Skip to main content

Full text of "The Georgia historical quarterly"

See other formats


RSYMOLDS HlSTORiCAL 
GENEALOGY COLLECTION 



ALLEN COUNTY PUBLIC L'fFjARY 



3 1833 01740 5298 



GENEALOGY 
975.8 
G2971 
1923 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2013 



http://archive.org/details/georgiahistorica07geor 



THE 
GEORGIA HISTORICAL 




QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 1 



MARCH. 1923 



THE 
GEORGIA HISTORICAL 
QUARTERLY 




^ORtC^ 



PUBLISHED BY THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 1 



MARCH, 1923 



One Dollar a Number Three Dollars a Year 



Application pending for entry as second-class matter 
at the post office at Savannah, Ga. 



ABeo County FuUiclIbrory 
FLWoynOflfidioiNi 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

OFFICERS 

President Vice-President 

WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING Atlanta 

First Vice-President Vice-President 

R. P. BROOKS Athens LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta 

Vice-President Secretary-Treasurer 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah CHARLES F. GROVES Savannah 

Librarian 
WILLIAM HARDEN Savannah 

CURATORS 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah HENRY R. GOETCHIUS Columbus 

R. P. BROOKS Athens WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah 

MRS. B. F. BULLARD Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING Atlanta 

ANDREW J. COBB Athens MRS. A. R. LAWTON Savannah 

T. M. CUNNINGHAM, jR.__Savannah A. C. NEWELL Atlanta 

LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta ORVILLE A. PARK Macon 

P. S. FLIPPIN Macon MRS. GORDON SAUSSY___Savannah 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON Savannah 

BOARD OF EDITORS 

ROBERT PRESTON BROOKS University of Georgia 

ELLIS MERTON COULTER University of Georgia 

PERCY SCOTT FLIPPIN Mercer University 

MANAGING EDITOR 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON 

Savannah Public Library 



CONTENTS 

Edward Langworthy and the First Attempt to Write a 
Separate History of Georgia. 

Leonard L. Mackall i 

The Atlanta Campaign (I) 

Thomas Rohson Hay 19 

The Yamassee RevoU of 1597 and the Destruction of 
the Georgia Missions. 

/. G. Johnson 44 

A Great Ambassador. 

R. P. Brooks, Ph.D 54 

Georgia Historical Society, Eighty-fourth Annual 

Meeting 65 

Memorial of Judge Beverly Evans. 

Andrew J. Cobb yy 

Editorial Notes 83 

Book Reviews : 85 

List of Members 91 



Trie Georgia Historical Quarterly 

Volume VII MARCH, 1923 Number 1 



EDWARD LANGWORTHY AND THE FIRST AT- 
TEMPT TO WRITE A SEPARATE HISTORY OF 
GEORGIA, WITH SELECTIONS FROM THE LONG- 
LOST LANGWORTHY PAPERS.^ 

By Leonard L. Mackall, 
savannah, ga. 

In 1847 the Preface to William B. Stevens's History of 
Georgia, published under the auspices of this Society, called 
attention to the fact that, though preceded by Hewitt's anony- 
mous An Historical Account of the Rise and Progress of the 
Colonies of South Carolina and Georgia (London, 1779, 
2 vols. ; reprinted with notes in Vol. I of B. R. Carroll's 
Historical Collections of South Carolina, New York, 1836), 
yet ''the first attempt to write a history of this State alone, 
originated with Mr. Edward Langworthy. This gentleman was 
first a pupil, then a teacher at Whitefield's Orphan House; 
but on the occurrence of the Revolution, he became warmly 
interested in the rebel cause — was one of the prominent 
'Liberty Boys' — was Secretary of the Provincial Congress of 
Georgia, and ultimately a representative of the State in the 
Congress of the United States. Mr. Langworthy had collected 
a variety of papers, and from his peculiar position during the 
period of our difficulties with England, must have been pos- 
sessed of rare materials for our revolutionary history. He left 
Georgia after the establishment of the Constitution, and 
settled in Maryland, where he died, and his papers have never 
been recovered." He is supposed to have died near Elkton, 
Md., about 1800. 



I This paper was read at the eighty-third Ar.nual Meeting of the Georgia 
Historical Society, Savannah, April 12, 1922. 



2 Leonard L. Mackall 

He was elected Secretary of the Georgia Council of 
Safety on its organization, December ii, i775; as Secretary 
of the Georgia Provincial Congress on February 2, 1776, he 
signed the credentials of the first Georgia Delegates to the 
Continental Congress; he was Secretary of the House when 
the first Constitution of Georgia was adopted (January- 
February, 1777), as appears from the extracts from the 
Minutes prefixed to the first printed edition (only) of that 
Constitution; ^ was elected to the Continental Congress on 
June 7, 1777, taking his seat on November 17, and last appear- 
ing there on April 6, 1779. He signed the Articles of 
Confederation July 24, 1778. These facts I have gathered 
from documents printed in Force' sAmerican Archives, the 
Journals of the Continental Congress, etc. 

C. C. Jones's Biographical Sketches of the Delegates from 
Georgia to the Continental Congress (Boston and New York, 
1891) adds practically nothing to Stevens as to Langworthy's 
life, but Jones tells us that Langworthy's "earliest public ap- 
pearance, so far as we can ascertain, was as one of the signers 
of a card which was published in the Georgia Gazette, on the 
7th of September, 1774, criticising certain patriotic resolutions 
adopted at a convocation of citizens held on the loth of the 
preceding month, and protesting against their being accepted 
as reflecting the sentiments of a majority of the inhabitants of 
Georgia. In that card he appears as in full sympathy with 
the Royalists in the Province. That his political views under- 
went a sudden and violent change may be fairly inferred from 
the fact that in the following year he became the efficient 
Secretary of the Republican Council of Safety. . . . He at one 
time held the position of Justice of the Peace for the County 
of Chatham." 



2 Printed by Lancaster, Savannah, 1777. There are copies of this first 
edition in the Library of Congress, and in the Library Company of Philadelphia. 
The DeRenne Library has a complete photostat of the former. Strange to say, 
both copies bore the autograph signature of George Walton on the title-page. The 
signature has been torn from the Philadelphia copy. The extracts from the Minutes 
printed only here remained unknown to the compilers of the Georgia Revolutionary 
Records I. 282 (iqoS). 



Langworthy^s History of Georgia 3 

This early near-Royalist "card," as Jones calls it, is in 

fact a long document dated August 30, 1774,^ signed by 103 
persons, including James Habersham, Lachlan McGillivray, 
Josiah Tatnall, Anthony Stokes, David Montaigut, Noble 
Jones (whose son Noble Wimberley Jones had signed the 
Tondee Tavern Resolutions of August 10, against which these 
are a protest!), James Habersham, Jr., Andrew Hewat, and 
others still "impressed wdthl a deep sense of gratitude to the 
Crown, and to the Parliament of Great Britain." It is in- 
teresting to us now in connection with the fact that Lang- 
worthy later remained convinced of the American patriotism 
of the traitor General Charles Lee (born in England and not 
related to Light Horse Harry Lee) of whom he wrote a 
well-known Memoir, which with Lee's essays and letters 
finally appeared in London in 1792, and was promptly re- 
printed in New York and elsewhere. It is, however, only 
fair to add that though Lee was dismissed from the American 
army hfs treasonable intentions were not proved until 1858 
(G. H. Moore's Treason of Charles Lee). As just mentioned, 
this book of Langworthy's (his only publication) was not 
printed until 1792, but the London editor's Preface states that 
the manuscript had been in his possession since 1786. (Lee 
had died in obscurity in 1782.) The New York Public Library 
has a three-page folio printed prospectus signed ''Goddard and 
Langworthy, Baltimore, June 10, 1785", praising Lee's char- 
acter and announcing the proposed work as to form three 
volumes. Evidently these Proposals were coldly received by 
the American public. The prospectus reads (omitting imma- 
terial passages) as follows: 

(Partial Transcript from photostat in the DeRenne Library of a 
Printed Prospectus in the New York Public Library.) 

PROPOSALS 
For Printing by Subscription, 
Miscellaneous Collections 
From the Papers of the late 



3 Cf. Jones, History of Georgia, II, 154^.; McCall, vol. II ch. i. Ap- 
parently the document has never been reprinted in full from the Georgia Gazette 
(copies in Georgia Historical Society and Library of Congress). Georgia Revolu- 
tionary Records, I, 282 (1908) merely reprints from White's Historical Collections 
and ignores the reference to MSS. in Stevens, II, 81 f. 



Leonard L. Mackall 



Major-General CHARLES LEE; 
consisting of 
I Pieces on various Political and Military Subjects. 
II Letters to the General from several Persons of the first 

Character, both in Europe and America. 
Ill Letters from the General to his Friends in Europe, before 
the late War; and also to the principal American 
Characters, both civil and military, during his Com- 
mand in the Continental Army: 
to which are prefixed 
Memoirs of his Life. 
The Whole will contain a great and useful Variety of 
military and political Knowledge, and in a striking Manner 
elucidate the Abilities and decisive Conduct of this great and 
experienced Officer : 

In Three Volumes. 

neque 

Si Chartae sileant, quod benefeceris, 
Mercedem tuleris. 

Hon [Od. IV, 8: 20-22] 

{page two:) To the Public. 

This work will be printed in Three handsome Octavo 
Volumes, on good Paper, with an elegant Type, neatly bound 
and lettered, and will *be sent to the Press as soon as a compe- 
tent Number of Subscribers can be obtained. 

The Price to each Subscriber will be One Guinea .... 

As the Editors are determined to make the greatest Ex- 
ertions towards rendering this valuable Work worthy the 
Library of every patriotic Citizen and Soldier, they flatter 
themselves their Endeavours will meet with abundant Success; 
and to remove every Prejudice that might arise against a 
Publication of this Nature, they beg Leave to call the Attention 
of the Public to the subsequent Extract, taken from the Memoirs 
of the General's Life [quotes "the most .... mind," pp. 68f. 
of London edition, on Lee's criticism of Washington, etc.] 

Notwithstanding, then, the Singularity and Eccentricity of 
General Lee's Character, we may with Justice affirm, that he was 
a great and sincere Friend to the Rights and Liberties of Man- 
kind; and there is every Reason to believe that this grand 
principle led him to take part on the Side of America. From 
his Youth he was bred up with the highest Regard for the 
noble Sentiments of Freedom; his Education and Reading 
strengthened them ; the Historians and Orators of Greece and 
Rome, with whom he was familiarly conversant, added to the 
sacred Flame, and his Travels to many Parts of the World did 
not tend to diminish it. 

The Volumes now proposed for Publication will testify what 
he sacrificed — what he did — and what he hazarded in the late 
important Contest, which separated the Colonies from the 
Parent State. 

Having said thus much, the Editors must now solemnly d;i- 
clare, they have not, in the Composition of this Work, been 



Langworthy's History of Georgia 5 

influenced by any Party Motives; but from a conviction that 
"good Name in Man or Woman is the immediate Jewel of the 
Soul." [Othello III 3.] In several Instances they have sup- 
pressed such Passages as they judged might be prejudicial to 
the Reputation of particular Men, who in many respects have 
deserved well of the Community . 

Goddard and Langworthy. 
Baltimore. June 10, 1785." 

As to Langworthy's ^'History of Georgia", Jones men- 
tions the prospectus in the Georgia Gasette as showing that 
the work had probably been actually written and was ready 
for the printer ; and he quotes from a letter from Langworthy 
to Seaborn Jones, the MS. of which was then in his (Jones's) 
possession and is now in the New York Public Library. I 
will read it in full in a moment. 

Nothing further seems known or discoverable about 
Langworthy and his History previous to an auction sale by 
Samuel T. Freeman & Company of Philadelphia just five years 
ago, April 10, 191 7. The sale catalogue kindly handed to me 
by Mr. J. Florance Minis (who had received it from Dr. I. 
Minis Hays, Secretary of the American Philosophical Society) 
was, to be sure, very vague and almost worthless, but the names 
of Langworthy and General James Jackson struck me at once 
as most significant. So I went to the auction myself, bought 
for the DeRenne Library twenty-eight lots, mostly manu- 
scripts, but including also rare broadsides and a slightly 
defective copy of the almost unique original edition of Charl- 
ton's Life of General James Jackson (Augusta, 1809). The 
manuscripts which interested me most were two letters (and 
an enclosure) written in 1795 from Jackson to Langworthy, 
expressly in connection with the latter's History; and it 
seemed not unreasonable to conclude, as intimated in my 
paper on the DeRenne Library read here and then elaborated 
for the Quarterly (June, 1918, p. 65, cf. 78), that these two 
letters and much of the other material from the same source 
("estate of the late George M. Conarroe, sold by order of the 
executors of Nannie D. Conarroe") had probably once formed 
part of Langworthy's collections. There can be no uncer- 



6 Leonard L. MackalL 

tainty whatever about this in the case of the originals of the 
letters to and from Langworthy which I am about to read, 
but there is necessarily doubt as to the rest. George M. 
Conarroe was an active collector of miscellaneous autographs, 
and he received them from very various sources. ^ Thus 
lot 729 in the above auction is a letter from John Berrien to 
Governor Jared Irwin, May 13, 1797, accompanied by 
a letter to Conarroe from John Macpherson Berrien dated 
November 26, 1851. Also the pencil memorandum on General 
Jackson's letter of January 28, 1795, was most evidently 
written by a son of Jackson's not before iS^y, since it refers 
to the edition of the Gazetteer of that date, so this particular 
MS. may well be a copy made and retained by Jackson himself 
when he mailed the original now lost. The enclosure in his 
letter of June 8 was evidently returned by Langworthy as 
requested in that letter. It is also significant that the pencil 
memorandum states expressly that the letter in the Gazetteer 
"was furnished Sherwood by Doct. Henry Jackson. I have 
not the copy." Probably it was Jackson's copy which was sent 
to Sherwood. Perhaps the note was written by Colonel 
Joseph W. Jackson (1796-1854), Mayor of Savannah 1826-28, 
and member of the Georgia Historical Society's Commission 
appointed in 1841 to request Stevens to write the History of 
Georgia. He it was who furnished Stevens with General 
Jackson's valuable Notes on Ramsay (of which MS. Notes 
our Society owns Stevens's transcript), which may have been 
originally written primarily for use by Langworthy. Since 
Stevens lived in Philadelphia while Conarroe was collecting 
there, it is easy to understand how he might have secured 
some of his Georgia material. Thus the history of the Lang- 
worthy collection remains obscure. From the Georgia House 
Journal of February 24, 1784 (Revolutionary Records, III, 
551), we know that his "books and papers were absolutely 
consumed" long before that date. Fortunately the destruction 
of his later material was not so complete. 

4 Cf. e. g. Lyman C. Draper's Essay on the Autographic Collections of 
the Signers of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution. (New 
York, 1889) p. 95. 



Langworthy's History of Georgia 7 

I have arranged the documents which now follow in 

chronological order, stating the present location of the source 
in each case except mss. in the DeRenne Library. 

Fortunately General James Jackson is still so well known 
as a brave soldier in the Revolution, as fearless fighter in the 
long and complicated Yazoo controversy ; ^ and as Gov- 
ernor of Georgia and United States Senator, that nothing 
more need be said of him before at last proceeding to read 
the documents themselves, which are of sufficient interest to 
neutralize the effect necessarily produced by so many pre- 
liminary dry details. 

(Transcript from photostat in the DeRenne Library of 
a MS. Letter in the New York Public Library.) 

Horse Savan : Jany 9th 1784. 
Dear Sir, 

I have just time to drop you a Line. I was really sorry 
that you passed thro' York when I was on a trading Voyage 
to Virginia; If I had been at home, I should have then been 
happy to have accompanied you to Georgia. I have not had 
the pleasure of seeing any person from our State since, till I 
met with M^ Glen & Mr Gibbons & immediately concluded on 
paying a visit to our Country, tho' in the course of last Year 
I heard dreadful Accounts from thence. 

I am sorry you are not at Savannah — at this time, I 
imagine your presence might be useful : however I hope things 
will take a turn for the better — and their Severity to Mr Glen 
will be done away — I wish it may be in my power to eradicate 
any prejudices out of any of them — Excuse this hasty Scrawl 
& with my Best Wishes for the safety and prosperity of your 
family — I am Dr Sir 

Your very humb : Servant 

Edwd Langworthy. 
Dr Jones 

At Charlestown. 

{N. B. The words "At Charlestown" are added in small 
capitals, perhaps by Dr. Noble W. Jones.) 



5 Jackson's Note on Ramsay, II, 382 begins: "The names of the officers of 
Jackson's Legion are as follows: 

"Thorns. Washington Major 

The famous speculator, but a good soldier." 
C. H. Haskins's excellent study of "The Yazoo Land Companies" in Papers of the 
American Historical Association, Vol. IV no. 4 (October, 1891), p. 7 (or 399) 
names him as Thomas Washington, "whose real name was Walsh, was an un- 
principled speculator, afterwards hanged in Charleston for counterfeiting South 
Carolina indents. — Georgia Gazette, March 24, 31, 1791." 



S Leonard L. Mackall 

(Copy of MS. Letter from James Jackson to Edward 

Langworthy. Original in the Society Collection of the 

Historical Society of Pennsylvania. Transcribed now from 

transcript received in May, 19 17, from its Librarian, the late 

Dr. John W. Jordan. 

Philadelphia, Deer 24th 1790 
My dear Sir, 

I have received your favor, for which I sincerely thank 
you particularly when you had no tie on your side (not having 
received my reply) to renew our Correspondence. If my vanity 
is to be roused at all, it must be by such as yourself — Men of 
Science and information, and I assure you that the encomium 
you too highly lavish on my conduct, will have no small weight 
as an inducement for its continuance. It is said that most Men 
in a certain degree know themselves — if this position be true — I 
feel that my grand object in the Legislature of the Union is the 
good of my Country. 

I wish it were possible for us to be a few hours together. 
I have with me the second volume of Ramsays South Carolina 
with my Notes thereon, which you shall be welcome to, but 
which would require some verbal explanation. I have a sincere 
wish that you would undertake the Work, Georgia has had no 
Friend to step forward, altho' some of her Citizens were un- 
doubtedly capable. Some, & among them Mr Walton, have 
had it in contemplation; but prejudices or personal services have 
prevented their proceeding. In the latter (& of course the dis- 
puted) part of the War, you were absent, and of course disin- 
terested — no objection therefore can be started, of either prejudice 
or wish of self praise against 3'^our performance, and it un- 
doubtedly would be consulted as chaste, in a future general His- 
tory. You had better I think if possible take some leisure time 
and make a trip to Georgia — I have not a doubt but that your 
subscription would be very considerable — could you not leave a 
Deputy or gain liberty from the head of the Department. Write 
me, and if you could take a day for this City, we could chat the 
business over & I could shew you the Volume I have mentioned. 

How many have you in Family I am getting too numerous 
a progeny. Mrs Jackson the other day produced me a third boy 
Wishing my Complimts to Mrs. Langworthy & you every 
Health. 

I remain with great esteem 

Dr Sir Yr Obedt Serv* 

Jas Jackson. 
[Addressed :] 

Edward Langworthy esquire 
Elkton 

Maryland 
Free 

Jas Jackson 

(Transcript from photostat in the DeRenne Library of 

the MS. Letter in New York Public Library, Emmet MS. 



Langworthy's History of Georgia 9 

^1303, formerly in C. C. Jones Jr. auction #653, April 24-26, 
1894. Cf. Jones's Biographical Sketches, etc., 1891, p. 138.) 

Elkton, March ist 1791. 
Dear Sir, 

Though I have not had the happiness of seeing you, since 
you have entered for yourself on the grand Theatre of human 
Life, yet I must assure you, it will give me great pleasure to 
hear that you are well & prosperous, a friend to the Liberties 
of Mankind, & a useful Member of the State to which you 
belong. 

Inclosed you will receive a Subscription Paper for "A 
Political History of the State of Georgia &c." for which I 
must request you to take in Subscriptions, & I flatter myself, 
you will succeed therein, as the design is a well meant Attempt 
to rescue the patriotic Exertions of our Countrymen from 
ObHvion, & the misrepresentation of some Writers of Amer- 
ican History. 

What Monies you will receive on this occasion, you will 
please to pay to Mr James Johnston, Printer, at Savanna, 
whose receipt will be your discharge. I shall be glad to hear 
from you at all times & proud to do any thing for you in this 
part of the Continent. Direct to me at Elkton, in the State 
of Maryland. 

I am. Dear Sir, your old Friend & 
very humble Servant 

Edwd Langworthy 
Seaborn Jones, Esqr. 

(Advertisement in the Georgia Gazette, Savannah, May 
12, 26, June 2, July 14 and 21, 1791.) 

A POLITICAL HISTORY 

OF 

THE STATE OF GEORGIA 

From its first Settlement. 

with 

MEMOIRS OF THE Principal Transactions which happened 

therein during the late Revolution. 

BY EDWARD LANGWORTHY, Esq., 

Nothing extenuate, 

Nor set down aught in malice Shakespeare. 

In Two Volumes. 
A Pompous elaborate declamation, to prove the usefulness of 
this work, would be needless ; the encouragement already given 
to writers of a similar class sufficiently demonstrates the general 
sense and approbation of the Public. 

The present performance has long employed the serious 
consideration of the Author, and its publication is a tes- 
timony of his regard towards a state in which he formerly 
spent many happy years. He could no longer silently observe 



10 Leonard L. Mackall 



several respectable writers, either through misinformation or 
ignorance, injuring the reputation of his Country— a country 
though not generally known yet of no small importance in the 
American Revolution. 

He has therefore been induced to publish a narrative of such 
transactions as came to his knowledge and observation through 
the medium of official information. Let him then flatter himself 
that the Patriots of Georgia will kindly receive this well meant 
attempt to rescue from oblivion the manifold exertions of the 
virtuous Citizen and intrepid Soldier; for such is the nature 
of the work which now solicits the attention and assistance of 
a generous and candid Public. 

PROPOSALS. 
I — The above work shall be printed on a neat elegant type and 
good paper, in two handsome volumes quarto. 
2 — The price to subscribers will be TWO DOLLARS; one dol- 
lar to be paid at the time of subscribing, the other on the 
delivery of the book. 

3 — The work shall be put to the press as soon as there are 
subscriptions sufficient to defray the expenses of the same. 
4 — Subscriptions will be received at the Printing Office in 
Savannah; at Augusta by Seaborn Jones, Esq., in Wilkes 
county by Gen. Clarke; and in Richmond by Gen. Twiggs. 

(General James Jackson to Edward Langworthy) 

Philadelphia, Jany 28, 1795. 
Dear Sir, 

I received your melancholy favor of the beginning of this 
Month, announcing your severe loss, in the death of Mrs. 
Langworthy — I should early have replied to it, but for a dan- 
gerous spasmodic affection, bordering on the lock Jaw; & 
proceeding from a bristling cut of an Oyster Shell, previous 
to my leaving Georgia — a bit, I fancy, had remained after the 
wounds healing — Dr. Rush laid open my knuckle, & applied 
Caustics, which after a violent suppuration, relieved me — I 
have however, scarcely used my pen since I last wrote you. — 

You can keep the papers I sent you, for such time as you 
may suppose convenient for your copying them — The present 
moment must be too afflicting for your attention — I sincerely 
hope your intended Work will be of service to your numerous 
Family, On the subject of the rise & progress of Georgia 
cultivation, & Exports, you will get good information from 
Andersons Tables, in his Commerce, ^ 5th Vol, & some 
detached pieces in other parts. Some Scraps, I believe, may 



a Adam Anderson's Historical and Clironological Deduction of the Origin 
of Commerce from the Earliest Accounts, Containing an History of the Great 
Commercial Jntamsts of the British Empire, etc. Dublin 1790, 6vols. _8vo. The 
London 1787-189 edition was in 4 vols. 4to. The previous (first) edition, 1764, 
2 vols, folio, stops at 1762. The 1790 edition, "Revised, corrected and con- 
tinued to the year 1789 by Mr. Cooinbe" contains in vol. V especially various 
data on Georgia, e. g. V, 10 "Exports from Georgia from 5 Jan. 1762 to 5 Jan. 
1763 from the Georgia Ga.^ette" (of Apr. 14, 1763). There is a chronological 
index in vol. VI. 

The Annual Register (in which the American part was then written by 
Edmund Burke) was largely copied by Gordon (1788) and Ramsay (1789). 



Langworthy's History of Georgia it 



also be collected from Hewits history of 5° Carolina & 
Georgia, not much, indeed, to be depended on, respecting the 
Government of Georgia — the early Annual Registers & Parlia- 
mentary Debates, must also contain (valuable) information: 

I have a day or two since written to General Morgan, 
acquainting him with my lodging his address to the Georg- 
ians & with you, for incorporation in the history ; and 
requesting a Certificate for you, of their conduct at the 
Cowpen — whether he complies or not, I will send you General 
Pickens's to that purport on my return to Georgia — with the 
names of the Georgia Officers, in that celebrated action — I have 
also written to Governor Brownson, who has left Georgia 
for certain Domestic Reasons, & I have found out resides in 
Vermont — I almost despair of hearing from him, as I am 

convinced he wishes concealment from his W who has not 

the best reputation, & she has already, driven him from 
Georgia & 5° Carolina— He may however answer, if he does, 
you shall have it. 

Do be at pains to write off, & inclose me, as soon as 
convenient, my Notes on Ramsey, ^ that I may enter them 
in another second Volume — to keep myself — & get again 
certified by Twiggs & Clarke — together with your certificate 
of the loss of the former Vol & their Certificate — it will be a 
strength & corroboration. — 

In the commencement of the Revolution, do not forget 
the pleasant anecdote of the Carolina delegation, to persuade 
Georgia to place herself under Carolina protection — Gwinnetts 
severe reply, & Treutlens proclamation — You must be well 
acquainted with all those transactions — Morse has a new edi- 
tion of his Geography coming out, some useful hints may be 
taken from it — boundaries &c. pretty correct. — A Map might 
not be amiss, but there is no good one extant — by next Session, 
I have reason to think, there will be a good one produced — for 
an account of Soil &c. of our back Country, see a Vagabonds 
account of it — one Smithe — who sold Frank Harris two fine 
Mares, who you recollect — he was a partial tory Scoundrel 
as to the Affairs of the U States but his description of the 
Country, is not bad — Bartrams travels, are of the Marvellous, 
but some hints may be there taken — and Hutchinsons 
Mississippi will furnish you a number. ^ I have a great 



b Morgan's address to the Georgians, 4th Jan. 1781 was printed in 
Charlton's Jackson p. 24, Stevens II, 253, Jones II, 468. Pickens's certificate 
dated February 6, 1797, follows Morgan's address in Charlton and Jones. 

c Jackson's Notes correct and supplement Vol. II of Ramsav's History 
of the Revolutions of South Carolina (Trenton, 1785). The transcript in the 
Georgia Historical Society {Annals 191 5, p. 36 )was made by Stevens from a 
MS. lent him by Colonel Joseph W. Jackson (son of the General), Cf. Georgia 
Historical Society Collections II p. i (of text) note. The DeRenne Library 
has a typewritten transcript of this transcript. The original MS. (or annotated 
book) seems lost. See note at end of article. 

d On Georgia & South Carolina, Gzvinnett and Treutlen cf. Jones II, 
27sf. Morse's Geography appeared in 1789, 1795 and 1796. "Smithe" is: A Tour 
in the United States by J. F. D. Smyth (London, 1784) 2\ vols. See note at end 
of article. W. Bartram's well-known "Travels through North & South Carolina, 
Georgia, East & West Florida, etc., first appeared at Philadelphia, 1791. 

Thos. Hutchinson's "An Historical Narrative and Topographical Descrip- 
tion of Louisiana and West-Florida . . . the River Miss." etc. Philadelphia i784. 



12 Leonard L. Mackall 



anxiety, that your work shall be a good one, as well for your 
own credit, as for that of the Country. I hope a first Vol 
(Manuscript) will be ready by next Winter — it will, I have 
no doubt, sell rapidly — There is no tolerable account even of 
that Country, let alone its politics. 

I hope your present Affliction will not long relax your 
labors — I think diversion from the affecting event necessary — 
Do let me hear from you as soon as possible — I shall go for 
Georgia in one Month. Should any other information strike 
you as wanting, let me know it, I will strive my utmost to 
procure it. In Jeffersons Correspondence with Hammond 

— answering the complaints of the latter No. 56 [?], as to some 
laws of Georgia, the former observes that as no state suffered 
more, being totally over run; so it must be expected, that the 
passions of her Citizens would be proportioned — You had 
better see it & take out that referring to Georgia for your 
conclusion — it will much please Walton & passions will not 
assail your candor — The above is not an exact extract, as I 
have not the Work before me. ^ 

Do inclose my little Jeu Desprit in poetry on the Cowpen 
— I am obliged to Mr. Edwards for the Paper you inclosed me — 
My illness must excuse me to him for not returning the favor 
— please to give him my Complimts 

I am Dr Sir 

Yr Obedt Servt & Friend 

Jas Jackson 

I think I inclosed you a letter of Waltons whilst in 
Congress, where he complains of the want of information & 
that the Deeds of Georgia are given to others — You can make 
an elegant comment on this in your introduction — it gives a 
great latitude for your Work & shows the reason why nothing 
earlier appeared. 
[MS. note in pencil on the margin of the MS, referring to pencil 
mark after the word' "Officers" above] See those names in 
my Father's letter to Geni Morgan published in Sherwood's 
Gazetteer of Georgia. That letter was furnished Sherwood by 
Doct. Henry Jackson. I have not the copy. Note. Geni Jack- 
son states that he was not only Brigade Major, but commanded 
all the Georgians in the Battle of Cowpens. 

[There are four editions of Adiel Sherwood's Gazetteer of 
Georgia, (Charleston, 1827, Philadelphia, 1829, Washington, 
1837, Macon, etc., i860). Jackson's letter mentioned in the 



e Jefferson's Correspondence with Hammond, the Minister from Great- 
Britain referred to by Jackson was published in Papers Relative to Great-Britain 
appended to Washington's Presidential Message to Congress of December 5, 1793- 
(Philadelphia, 1793 and 1795) and is reprinted in American State Papers, 
Foreign Relations Vol. I (1833) and in the Ford and Bergh editions of Jefferson's 
Works. My copy of the 1793 volume bears the autograph of James Gunn, 
Senator from Georgia, 1 789-1 801. Cf. note g. 



Langworthy's History of Georgia 13 

above pencil note appears only in the Third Edition, i8^y, p. 
288f. as follows, H : 

"The following, while it is creditable to Gen. Jackson, also 
throws light on the history of the battle of Cowpens, and the 
part taken in it by Georgians. This letter was addressed to 
Gen. Morgan, and found among his papers. 

Senate Room, United States, 
Philadelphia, January 20, 1795. 
Dear General— Since I last saw you in Philadelphia, which I 
think was in 1791. a gentleman has undertaken to write the 
history of Georgia. Your address to the Georgia Refugees 
[Jones II, 468f. — from Charlton p. 24f. — L.L.M.Ipubhshed at 
Picolet, in South Carolina, being in my hand, I gave it to 
him among other materials for insertion. The same gentle- 
man, a Mr. Langworthy, has applied to me for other docu- 
ments, and particularly to know if any Georgians were at 
the Cowpens. None of the authors who have written, have 
mentioned them in this action, nor did the account even of 
your Aid-de-Camp, Major Giles, to Congress, notice them, or 
any officer belonging to the State, although the officers of 
the other States were generally mentioned, and their militia 
applauded. The Georgians have imputed this to the loss of 
your despatches, and not to any intention of yourself, who 
have always been one of their favorite commanders, but they 
think hard of the silence respecting them, in that celebrated 
action, and did you the honor of turning the tide of affairs in 
favor of the United States. 

My object in writing at present, is to request, if you see 
no impropriety in it, your giving a certificate under your hand, 
of there being present three companies — the detachment was 
small, but if you recollect you placed them in front of the 
whole, and they strictly obeyed your orders, in keeping up a 
warm fire, and gradually retreating. I could wish your ex- 
pressing, that they behaved as well as the other militia in the 
field. The officers commanding, if you choose to say anything 
of them, were Major Cunningham, and Captains Samuel 
Hammond, George Walton, and Joshua Inman, who all be- 
haved well, and the latter was peculiarly serviceable to you 
in advising you of the enemies' approach, and skirmishing with 
their advance — the detachment was under my immediate 
command and direction, although I acted also, as Brigade 
Major to all the militia present. It is with difficulty I men- 
tion myself; but having the honor of introducing Major 
M'Arthur, the commander of the British Infantry, a prisoner 
on that occasion — taken by myself, and having run the utmost 
risk of my life, in attempt to seize the colors of the 71st 
Regiment, in the midst of it, on their attempt to form after 
they were broken — being saved by an exertion of Colonel 
Howard's, and for which I had the honor of your thanks on 
the field of battle. I think it a duty to my children, as the 



f McCrady's History of South Carolina IV, 34 seems to think that this 
letter was first printed in the Atlanta Constitution of January 5, 1902 (which did 
not name its source). 



14 Leonard L. Mackall 



history of my State is to be told, to have some insertion 
even of my conduct in that well fought battle. You, sir, 
were rendered immortal by the action : my ambition is, to let 
my descendants and the citizens of Georgia know, that I was 
present and contributed my mite to your glory. General 
Pickens has already certified to the request of this letter fully 
[cf. Jones II, 47of., Charlton p. 25f., Johnson's Greene I, 
383 — L.L.M.] — but whilst you are alive, his certificate is not 
the best evidence, and your testimony will be grateful to the 
citizens of Georgia. 

I am sorry to break in on the important business of 
your present command, and should have waited until next 
session of the Federal Legislature, when we hope to see you 
a member, but for the pressing request of Mr. Langworthy to 
have the necessary papers. 

I am, dear General, with the highest esteem and re- 
spect, your old fellow soldier, and most obedient servant. 

Jas. Jackson. 
If you could favor me with an answer previous to the rising of 
Congress, about the ist of March, it would highly oblige me.] 

(James Jackson to Edward Langworthy) 

Philadelphia 8th June 1795 
My Dear Sir 

After a most fatiguing attempt to reach Georgia and 
which lasted for the whole Month of March. I thought it 
prudent to return to New York — it was nearly the end of 
April when the Ship I sailed in from hence reached Charles- 
ton whither she was bound — the prospect indeed was so bad 
when I left her, that I should have expected a much longer 
continuance on* board had I remained — of course my friend 
all my expectations of upsetting the abominable Speculation 
in Georgia was blasted by the unfortunate passage. I lament 
it but must submit, altho the wicked triumph — Mrs. Jackson 
had given me over as lost to her, and our little ones, and 1 
have the satisfaction of learning that my supposed loss was 
much regretted by all ranks but those interested in unjust 
Speculations and some avowed enemies. 

I have not yet learnt whether you sent on to Georgia 
the Notes I requested you, if not please to forward them to 
me here (I need not say I allude to mine on Ramsay) — inclosed 
I send you a letter from one of my Officers, which I thought 
I had already inclosed you — it is to shew you the sufferings we 
all underwent at the close of the War and the Spirit of industry 
absolute want had raised up among us — My Dragoons were 
clothed and armed, except Pistols by themselves — even their 
Caps and boots & Spurs their Coats were made of Deer Skin 
dressed and turned up with the little blue cloth I could procure. 
I do not wish to enhance the value of my little Corps at the 
expense of the Continentals who were annihilated previous to 
its formation and of whom Lee has spoken so handsomely — 
or of the Militia of Georgia on the other hand whose exertions 
and sufferings were far beyond those of any other State. 



Langwortiiy's History of Georgia 15 



Mr. Jefferson in his correspondence with Hammond re- 
plying to his complaints respecting laws passed in Georgia 
makes the following observations : 

"The following are the Acts of your Catalogue which 
belong to this head with such short observations as are neces- 
sary to explain them. Beginning at that end of the Union 
where the War having raged most we shall meet with the most re- 
pugnance to favor Georgia, July 29th [1783] "An act releasing 
certain persons from their bargains &c." 

After reasoning on the nature of the respective laws 
which Mr. Hammond complained of and which you will find 
in the 35th page of his correspondence 9 (Jefferson's letter) 
Mr. J. proceeds to observe: 

"li the conduct of Georgia should appear to be peculiarly 
uncomplying it must be remembered that that State had pe- 
culiarly suffered; that the British army had entirely overrun 
it; had held possession of it for some Years and that all the 
Inhabitants had been obliged either to abandon their estates, 
and fly their country or to remain in it under a Military 
Government." (You had better see this Work, there are other 
observations worth selecting.) 

I think those paragraphs strong ground to build on — 
they yield us the Palm of suffering in the revolution at any 
rate — My whole Corps had been for Months with nothing to 
quench their thirst but the common Swamp water near 
Savannah and for 48 hours together without Bread Rice or 
any thing like it. (Waynes whole Army suffered prodigiously.) 
A new history is come out from England of the Origin 
progress and termination of the American War" [by Stedman, 
1794]. I have not greatly dipped in it but its accounts of some 
actions very little vary from mine, particularly that of the 
action at Blackstocks on Tyger River — he writes in opposition 
to Tarleton & writes truly except as to numbers and the 
commanding Officer — Sumpter he says [n,2i2f.] kept the 
field — Sumpter retired as I have stated wounded early in the 
Action and Twiggs kept the Field — I advanced by his order 
in sight of the encampment & fires and took thirty of their 
Horses after the action was fully over. — The generosity he 
mentions was shewn — numbers were assisted into the houses — 
but he is short as to their killed and wounded. Two South 
Carolina Colonels [Richard] Winn and TEdwardl Lacy (the 
latter particularly) deserved credit, but those South Carolina 
Officers were under Twiggs and the Georgians bore the brunt 
of the battle as I have related. You can see this history at Rice's 
Book Store in Baltimore. 



g The passage quoted from Jefferson's most elaborate letter to Hammond 
dated May 29, 1792, on p. 35 of the 1793 volume (mentioned above in note e) 
may be found in American State Papers, Foreign Relations, I, 204, and in 
Jefferson's Works ed. Bergh XVI, 200-202 (1904), or ed. Ford VI: 2^. 

Jefferson defends Georgia in Section 10 of his letter, and probably "No. 56" 
in Jackson's previous letter should read thus. Appendix No. 56 to Jefferson's letter 
is a certificate as to Georgia Courts signed by W. Few, J. Gunn, Abr. Baldwin and 
Frans. Willis, dated April 25, 1792 and addressed to Jefferson in reply to a query 
from him dated April 16. 



i6 Leonard L. Mackall 



Do take care of my original papers. I shall wish again 
to be possessed of them when you are done with them. Has 
Major Habersham ever assisted you with papers of his Fathers, 
I am sure he would do so. The history of North Carolina 
will shortly [1812!!] make its appearance by Doctor William- 
son — lately in Congress — I expect he will pick Ramsay a little 
on the other side, he certainly deserves it. H I can in re- 
turning I will take Baltimore in the way (that is if a Vessel 
should offer in I suppose a fortnight or three Weeks) in 
order to see you — I am just going to Senate on the Treaty. 

God bless you 
Yr Friend & Servt 

Jas Jackson 

Do write me as soon as possible & I will write you in 
turn as soon as I can on our present work. God bless you my 
friend & your Family. 



The inclosure in the above letter was probably the follow- 
ing letter addressed on verso. 

"To 

Lieut. Coll. James Jackson 
Commanding 
Georgia State 
Favored by Legion 

Capt Allison Camp" 

and reading thus 

Augusta, Api 15-1782 
Dr Coll— 

I was about leaving this place agreeable to your Orders 
on Monday the 7*^ Instant but on the Arrival of Cap*. 
Allison he Verbally Countermanded the Orders by your Con- 
sent, he being an Officer in your Legion was the only Means 
that Induced me to Continue here, as I should not have paid 
any Respect to Orders (verbal) that may have Come to me 
by any other person. — 

I have sent by this conveyance Seven Horsman's 
Caps, four Pair Shoe Boots, two Leather Jackets and five 
pair Overalls and Twenty Pair Brass Spurs which I hope may 
come safe to hand. I now have Coursey at work & shall have 
some Shoes made which I will forward by Cap* Stalling, 

My Situation here my Di" Coll : is truly Distressing not 
one Mouthfull of Bread to be had, no Salt, & nothing to 
subsist on but Poor Beef — I shall Think myself happy (Should 
it be your pleasure) to be Recall'd. however I shall always 
with Chearfullness pay that due Respect while in your Service 
to whatever Orders you may please Command me. 

I remain my Dr Coll. with the greatest Esteem Yr very 
hume Seryt 

Thos. Hamilton, Lt. Infantry. 



Langworthy's History of Georgia 17 



Jackson has endorsed this letter, on the address side : 

No. 22 

Ths. Hamilton 

15 April 1782 
Sent to Mr L. to show the horrid situation we were frequently 
in, in Georgia in 1782 — My Legion being frequently without 
Bread, Rum Whisky or other Liquour unknown & not seldom 
without even Beef. 

I made all my own accoutrements, even to Swords for 
my Dragoons — Caps Leather Jackets Boots & Spurs & in short 
every article the manufacture did not cost the State of 
Georgia a farthing. The State received all the benefit and 
charged as well for the materials some of which she paid 
for as the manufacturing of them which she did not pay for 
to the United States. [sic] 



The transcript of Jackson's Notes on Ramsay, mentioned 
in my note C ends with a certificate dated Augusta, Dec, 24, 
1791, by Major-General John Twiggs and Brigadier-General 
Elijah Clarke, who had together commanded the Georgia 
Militia, certifying that ''the facts contained in the said Notes 
are just and true, most of them having happened under our own 
eyes," and that "all faith and credit ought to be placed in the 
relation of facts by the said Notes." 

Smyth, mentioned in Note d, was a plausible adventurer 
who applied for compensation to the Royal Commission on 
the Losses etc. of American Loyalists, as appears from Mrs. 
Keid's Roxburghe Club volume, 191 5, pp. xliii, liii, 127, 143, cf. 
Georgia Historical Quarterly, II, 82. 









N //n. 

'— X'T. .*.,.it<:a!,.o J/,i?#^M(S,^r '^;^fot'?S»^% l*0T.ra>»,i8C3, 
TOmlc oWooVy J 
■^ttUpQf l?)«-l(y iJdop may 12, 

WorZ°C / /^^25,3Et3^,iaJj2^r8CI 

•& ^ JHM P . Oim"*! c..tJP'F' ""'S' M U^ R R A (Y ^ /°Conaasauga 

^FortlVl.iunt»i..Sp rfi / V 



A[apofihe' 




<y alley/store 
1 Factory 




^SQbligiia,r 



c H N!:^ffT- 



}au'les|iay^ii1a 



^Saca Buff^ AHieelerJlr-' ^\C«rti?lS(J*|^^ _i^l.??,°^*- 



.."opieasact HiU Ch o,< 

>L';.''^^ Mill ^1"^^. 






I RLdBWD 

TCALHOUN^ 



N',^kiS^gfe,ck iiuis^" 



Kse'iS 



gCrystalJ 






/d^/^l ^f--^ O JJY D /f \ .f/Halls i Braos,^,, .Mills /^ll^t'-^r^jjv^ ,;^.4s) /V^^^'^e?'^^— ^2^ 



^ oFt. oOrani 
!ton g 

lfacedoniao| 



C^,^^-v.;<;v'^ X V 'V l^.'O^ I^^v»'BeslJ*»wjC4: iy'^WStrBavLafi'lSSprint^ VrV.O ^^1 llacedoniaol ^ 

S.lvcrfcrccU .■ci.ujio i/^^^^^^^^^ / °Froeniaus]i^ 

' / I p,,l.» J c.,^<K^ MSt!pns^Daii*#la /ICS, _^ FieMs Cross W 



►MciajKyi 



'''Vof ,-'- , 1 l.uru-.l. „-fm,ipkin / T^ , T ^::ijrc-^CrMil- Inst. |t^c!: 







•♦•Bnttit 

^V^lUmphill 
'^ ji4raCl.urcl..4-;- 
yl28.18G4. 



F U\L T/o O) N 




I /If Lail anj Hill o/ .U.tl'.iina iri.i thr iM,,rirna .ii/rf A'.vyA Geerjjm riii/i-onr/s hnve been built since the : 

Reprinted by courtesy of Hon. Joseph ]\I. Brown. 



THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN 
By Thomas Robson Hay 

After the disastrous rout from the heights facing Chatta- 
nooga, Tenn., in the last week of November, 1863, the Con- 
federate Army of Tennessee, commanded by General Braxton 
Bragg, retreating southward, finally came to rest in northern 
Georgia and went into winter quarters about the small town of 
Dalton. General Bragg, both from necessity and also because 
of his own request, was relieved from command of the army 
and after a brief rest was assigned to duty in Richmond as 
confidential and personal military adviser to President Davis. 
General William J. Hardee, one of the corps commanders, 
was assigned in his place, but as Hardee declined the command, 
President Davis reluctantly selected General Joseph E. John- 
ston, then on duty in Mississippi, as the permanent commander. 
General U. S. Grant, commanding the Federal forces in 
Chattanooga and vicinity, was promoted to Gieneral-in-Chief 
of the Northern armies. In March, 1864, he went east 
to take personal command in A^irginia, leaving his most dis- 
tinguished subordinate, General W. T. Sherman, to direct 
the operations of the Northern army that was to begin the 
offensive movement into Georgia in the spring. Throughout 
the winter, the armies of Johnston and Sherman remained 
facing each other and making necessary preparations for the 
coming campaign. 

The Federal advance to Atlanta, simultaneously with 
Grant's advance to Richmond, began on the 5th of May, 1864. 
The Federal plan of campaign was to cut in half that part of 
the Confederacy lying between the Mississippi River and the 
Atlantic seaboard by an advance southward from Chatta- 



/ — Davis to Johnston, Dec, 16, 1863, The War of the Rebellion: A Com- 
pilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, 32 part 
3:835. Henceforth cited as "O. /?."_ All citations relate to the first series uii' 
less otherwise stated. 



20 Thomas R. Hay 

nooga to Atlanta and beyond.^ General Sherman was to 
follow General Johnston's forces so closely and persistently 
as to prevent the dispatch of any re-enforcements to Lee's 
army in Virginia, which Grant planned, likewise, to closely 
and persistently engage. For Sherman, neither territory nor 
cities were to be the objective, but Johnston's army, which was 
to be followed, "go where it might." ^ 

On the 5th the Confederate troops, consisting of Hood's 
and Hardee's corps, were formed to the north and west of 
Dalton to receive the enemy. Polk's corps, in Mississippi, 
consisting of VV. W. Loring's and S. G. French's divisions, 
which had been in readiness to move promptly to Johnston's 
assistance, was ordered to do so on the 5th. ^ These 
troops joined Johnston on the loth and nth of May ^ at 
Resaca, south of Dalton, to which point Johnston had then 
retired. 

To carry on his offensive movement Sherman had avail- 
able 110,123 effectives,^ divided into the Armies of the 
Cumberland, Tennessee, and Ohio, commanded respectively 
by Generals George H. Thomas, James B. McPherson, and 
John M. Schofield. "^ To oppose these forces General John- 
ston could muster only a total effective force of 66,089 men, ^ 
divided for the campaign, into three army corps under 
Generals William J. Hardee, Leonidas Polk, and John B. 
Hood. In this number were included 10,569 cavalry ef- 
fectives, ^ which, deducted from the total number men- 
tioned, gave an effective force of infantry and artillery in the 



2 — Grant's General Report, July 22, 1865, O. R., 38, part 1:3; Grant to 
Sherman, April 4, 1864, O. R., 32, part 3:246. 

3 — Sherman's Report, O. R., 38, part 1:59-63; Memoirs of General W. T. 
Sherman, 2:27. Henceforth cited as Sherman. 

4 — Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:614; Polk to Cooper, May 6, 1864, 
O. R., 38, part 4:669; W. M. Polk, Leonidas Polk. Bishop-General, 2:348. 
Henceforth cited as Polk. 

5 — Polk, 2:349. 

6 — T. L. Livermore, Numbers and Losses in the Civil War, 119. Hence- 
forth cited as Livermore. 

7 — Sherman, 2:13. 

8 — Livermore, 120. 

9 — Ibid., 119. 



The Atlanta Campaign 2i 

three corps of 55,520 men. Of this number 40,900 effective 
infantry and artillery ^^ made up the Army of Tennessee, 
the force which met the initial advance. 

The position at Dalton had little to recommend it for 
defensive purposes. It had neither intrinsic strength nor 
strategic advantage, as it did not fully cover Johnston's line 
of communications nor did it threaten those of the enemy. ^^ 
The railroad from Chattanooga to Atlanta passes through 
Rocky Face Ridge, running in a north and south direction, 
by Mill Creek Gap, about three miles to the north, and offers 
little obstacle to the advance of a superior force from Ring- 
gold, lying to the west. To the south of Mill Creek Gap and 
between these points the ridge protects the railroad from an 
attack from the west, and at the same time covers any direct 
approach from Chattanooga to Resaca and Calhoun, lying 
to the south of Dalton. For these reasons Johnston had 
thought to draw his troops back into the vicinity of Calhoun, 
but was prevented from doing so by the Richmond authorities, 
who were planning for an early resumption of offensive opera- 
tions and who also feared the effect of a retrograde move- 
ment on the spirits of the troops and the people. ^^ 

The first few days of the campaign were made up largely 
of skirmishes between the advance troops of the opposing 
forces, which at times rose to the dignity of an engagement. 
On the 8th a spirited fight took place at Dug Gap. The Con- 
federate losses were light, as the troops were protected by 
intrenchments. ^^ On the morning of the loth. General 
Patrick Cleburne's division of Hardee's corps was directed 
to move toward Resaca, ^-^^ which had been occupied by 
Cantey's advance brigtade of Polk's corps and was threat- 



I 



10 — Ibid., 120, note 

II — Joseph E. Johnston, Narrative of Military Operations, 277. Hence- 
forth cited as Narrative. 

12 — Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:615; Narrative, 277-78; Jefferson 
Davis, Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, 2:548-49. Henceforth cited 
as R. & F. 

13 — Cleburne's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:721; Narrative, 307; Irving A. 
Buck, Cleburne and his Command, 2^2. Henceforth cited as Buck. Buck was 
Captain and A. A. G. of Cleburne's division, and was captured at Jonesboro 
on Sept. I, 1864. 

14 — Cleburne's Report O. R., 38, part 3:721; Narrative, 307. 



22 Thomas R. Hay 

ened by a flanking move by McPherson's troops going 
through Snake Creek Gap. McPherson did not press on to 
Resaca, but halted, after going a short distance south of the 
gap, to await re-enforcements. He has been accused of not 
pressing his attack aggressively, as he had at his immediate dis- 
posal some 23,000 men against Cantey's two small brigades. ^^ 
It would seem, however, that McPherson's course was 
prudent. He had advanced too far, and, as the Federal forces 
attacking at Dug Gap had been held in check, he would have 
stood liable to have been cut off by an attack in his rear by 
Johnston's forces closing in from the north. On the other 
hand, though the gap was comparatively easy to obstruct, 
no satisfactory explanation has ever been made as to why 
McPherson was allowed to pass through this way unopposed. 
General Johnston's Chief of Staff, General W. W. Mackall, 
says that it was because of disobedience of orders. ''' 

As the main body of Sherman's army was en route through 
Snake Creek Gap, Johnston found it necessary to evacuate 
his position at Dalton and to move south to prevent having 
his line of communications cut. By May 13 the Con- 
federate army in the vicinity of Resaca was drawn up in 
two lines, in a general north and south direction and facing 
west, Polk on the left, Hardee in the center, and Hood on 
the right. The 14th and the morning of the 15th were passed 
in skirmishing, but on the afternoon of the 15th word was 
received that the Federal forces were approaching Calhoun, 
to the south of Resaca, and as this movement again threatened 
Johnston's line of communications, the continued occupation 
of Resaca w'as too hazardous. ^^ Thus twice in a fortnight 



75 — Sherman, 2:34; Sherman "was somewhat disappointed" that McPherson 
did not take Resaca but he "appreciated the advantage gained." Sherman's 
Report, O. R., 38, part i -.64. 

16 — Buck, 234; J. W. DuBose, General Joseph Wheeler and the Army of 
Tennessee, 283. Henceforth cited as DuBose. Cleburne confirms Mackall's 
statement, Cleburne's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:721. There is much silence in 
tlie matter of this failure to properly fortify and defend Snake Creek Cap. Cf. 
W. C. W JJreckiuridge in Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. 4:279; J. E. 
Johnston in Ibid., 4:263, and J. E. Johnston in Annals of the Civil War, 331-32- 
Johnston said nothing concerning the matter in his report nor does Hood mention 
it 5 neither Hardee nor Polk made any report of the operations at this point. 

ij — Narrative, 314. 



The Atlanta Campaign 23 

had Sherman, with Httle risk to himself, skilfully maneuvered 
his superior forces in such a manner ;as to force his antago- 
nist to retire before him without a battle. The Confederate 
troops moved southward to Adairsville. Johnston had proposed 
to make a stand at this place and to place his army across the 
valley in which the railroad lay, with his flianks upon the 
heights on either side, but the valley in which the army was at 
the time was too wide to be entirely covered by the front of 
the army and, accordingly, Johnston put his troops in motion 
southward toward Cassville. ^^ Two roads led southward 
from Adairsville, one directly to Cassville and the other 
to Kingston, about seven miles to the west. The fronts of 
the two armies were greatly extended, though the flanks of 
the Federal army were farther apart than those of the Con- 
federate army. Johnston proposed taking advantage of this 
situation by having Polk's corps make a stand on the Cass- 
ville road, while Hardee should guard the left flank toward 
Kingston, Hood attacking the Federal left under Schofield as 
it deployed to attack Polk. ^^ The project failed through 
Hood's fault, as under a misapprehension he changed the 
position of his corps by facing to his right, to be ready to 
meet an expected attack on his right, and the time thus lost 
prevented the proposed turning movement from being carried 
out. ^^ After the failure of this proposed operation John- 
ston, with his three corps, then took up a strong defensive 
position on a ridge immediately south of Cassville. 



18 — Itinerary of Hardee's Corps, May 15 to June 14, 1864, Journal kept 
by Maj. Henry Hampton, Acting A. A. G., Hardee's Corps, O. i?., 38, part 
3:704-5; Journal of operations of the Army of Tennessee kept by Lt. T. K. 
Mackall, A. D. C. to General W. W. Mackall, Chief of Stafif to General 
Johnston, from May 14 to June 4, 1864, O. R., 38, part 3:978-81. 

19 — M. F. Steele, American Campaigns, 1:539. Henceforth cited as Steele; 
Narrative, 321-22; Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:616. 

20— -Narrative, 321-22; Letter from "One of Hardee's Men" quoted in 
Publications of the Southern Historical Society, 21: 314-21. Henceforth cited as 
5". H. S.; S. G. French, reply to "One of Hardee's Men," quoted in 5". H. S. 
22:1-10; J. B. Hood, Advance and Retreat, 98-116. Henceforth cited as Hood. 
Polk, 2:355-58 and 376-82; Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:616; Mackall's 
Journal, Ibid., 978-81; Hampton's Itinerary, Ibid., 704-5; Memoranda, dated Sept. 
22, 1864, of operations at Cassville by General W. W. Mackall, Chief of Staff to 
General Johnston, Ibid., 621-22. 



M Thomas R. Hay 

At Cassville the troops were in the best of spirits and 
very confident. ^^ Here General Johnston read an address 
expressing his continued confidence in them and his intention 
to give battle to the enemy. Johnston had fully intended to 
make a stand at Cassville. ^^ At midnight of the 19th 
General Cleburne received orders to put his command in 
motion to Cartersville. Meeting General Hardee, he express- 
ed his disappointment and surprise at being ordered to with- 
draw, as the troops were confident and eager to be led to 
battle. He could not understand why, so soon after reach- 
ing his position. General Johnston should have changed his 
mind. ^^ Hardee replied that at a conference between 
General Johnston and two of his corps commanders, Generals 
Hood and Polk, it was stated that these troops occupied un- 
tenable positions due to an enfilading fire from .the Federal 
artillery. With this lack of confidence on the part of two 
of his three subordinate commanders. General Johnston felt 
that the hazard was too great to risk a battle. ^^ General 
Hardee had remonstrated, on hearing of the proposed re- 
tirement, and expressed confidence in his ability to hold his 
position, notwithstanding the fact that his command had little 
or no advantage of ground. ^^ General Johnston after- 
ward said that he greatly regretted not having adhered to his 
original plans and to Hardee's judgment and made a decided 
stand at Cassville. ^^ 

The army moved south to the Etowah River, which it 
crossed near the railroad bridge. The two armies now paused 
for several days, Johnston to give his men a rest and Sher- 



21 — Buck, 243; Hampton, in his Itinerary, says the prospect of a fight "was 
received with enthusiasm by the troops,'' O. R., 38, part 3:705; Mackall records 
in his Journal: "Troops very much wearied by night marches; in good spirits 
and confident." Ibid., 983. 

22 — Johnston to Davis, May 20, 1864,0. R., 38, part 4:728; Narrative, 322; 
J. E. Johnston in Battles and Leaders of the Civil War, 4:269. Henceforth 
cited as B & L. 

23 — Buck, 244. 
24 — Buck, 244; J. E. Johnston in S & L, 4:268; Narrative, 333; Hood, 104-9; 
Polk, 2:356-57. 

25 — Hampton's Itinerary, O. R., 38, part 3:704; Mackall's Journal, Ibid., 
981; W. W. Mackall, Memoranda, Ibid., 622; Johnston in B & L, 4:268; Polk, 
2:357; Narrative, 324; Robert M. Hughes, General Johnston, 233. Hencefortii 
cited as Hughes. 

26 — Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:616. 



The Atlanta Campaign 25 

man to repair his supply railroad and to make ready for the 
next move. The next position to the south was a strong one 
at Allatoona Pass. Sherman, as a young lieutenant, had ridden 
through this country and had noted well its topography. He 
decided to turn Allatoona Pass by a movement to the south- 
west across the Etowah River in the direction of Dallas and 
Marietta. On the 23rd of May this movement was begun 
and by the 25th all the troops were moving steadily on 
Dallas. ^7 

On the 23rd Johnston, hearing of Sherman's movements, 
marched his army toward Dallas and by the 25th it had reach- 
ed the vicinity of New Hope Church, at which place a fierce, 
but unsuccessful, attack was made on A. P. Stewart's division 
of Hood's corps by a Federal corps under General Joseph 
Hooker. On the night of the 25th Cleburne's division of 
Hardee's corps was detached to support Hood, and on the 26th 
was placed in line on his right. During the afternoon of the 
26th and the morning of the 27th, rifle-pits for the first line 
were constructed. On the afternoon of the 27th, about 4 p.m., 
the 4th Corps and a division of the 14th Corps, under the 
direction of General O. O. Howard, moved to attack and dis- 
perse Cleburne's command and thus to turn the Confederate 
right. The attack, though made in mass formation, was 
gallantly and firmly met and repulsed with great loss to the 
attacking troops. ^^ This fight, known as the battle of 
Pickett's Mills, was a most sanguinary affair. The Federals 
attacked with great gallantry, sustaining heavy losses. Cle- 
burne's men, with equal gallantry, repelled all assaults, sus- 
taining small losses as they were protected by intrenchments. 
General Sherman does not mention the day's operations nor 
the severe repulse there sustained. 

On the morning of the 29th Cleburne's division was 
moved from the right and rejoined Hardee in front of Dallas. 



zf- — Sherman, 42-43; J. M. Brown, The Mountain Campaigns in Georgia, 40. 
Henceforth cited as Brown, Mountain Campaigns. 

28 — Hampton's Itinerary, May 27th, O. R., 38, part 3:706; Mackall's Journal, 
entry May 28th, Ibid., 987; Hood's Report, Ibid.. 761; Stewart's Report, Ibid., 
818; Cleburne's Report, Ibid., 372; Buck, 248; J. E. Johnston in B & L, 4:268-69. 



2.^ Thomas R. Hay 

In the afternoon of the 28th General Hood was instructed 
to form, facing the left flank of the enemy, and attack at 
dawn of the 29th, Hardee and Polk to attack successively 
as Hood's movement progressed. The Federal troops under 
General R. W. Johnson were busy intrenching to meet an ex- 
pected attack. Hood's movements, because of this fact, be- 
cause of the delay in getting into position, and because of the 
absence of the element of surprise were countermanded. ^^ 
On the 1st of June Sherman began a movement to Johnston's 
right to turn his position at New Hope Church, and by the 
5th he was across the railroad and in possession of Allatoona. 
Johnston moved his forces to the northeast of Kennesaw 
Mountain and by the 8th was in position to again oppose the 
Federal advance. ^^ On the 14th General Johnston and 
Generals Hardee and Polk and others were on top of Pine 
Mountain making observations, when General Polk was killed 
by a cannon shot from a Federal battery located in the woods 
below the mountain. ^^ General W. W. Loring temporarily 
assumed command of the corps, and on July 7 was suc- 
ceeded by General A. P. Stewart, who had been promoted to 
the rank of lieutenant general. 

Because Pine Mountain was in advance of the main line 
and the troops stationed there were liable to be cut off, it was 
abandoned, and the troops were withdrawn to a line connecting 
Kennesaw Mountain, just to the north of Marietta, with Lost 
Mountain, lying to the west of that 'place. By the 19th the 
change of position had been completed, but in order to better 
station the available troops, Lost Mountain was evacuated and 
the line consolidated. Hood's corps was on the extreme right ; 
Polk's (Loring's) in the center, two divisions occupying the 
crest of Kennesaw Mountain; and with Hardee formed on 
level ground on the left of the line. During all these move- 
ments it rained continuously, causing much discomfort to the 



29 — Cleburne's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:726; Hampton's Itinerary, May 26 
and 29, Ibid., 706; Mackall's Journal, entry May 28, Ibid., 987; Johnston's Re- 
port, Ibid., 616; Hood says nothing of this failure in his Report. 

30-;— Sherman, 2:46; Johnston in B & L, 4:270. 

31— Ibid., 271; Sherman, 2:53; Polk, 2:372-74. 



The Atlanta Campaign 2^] 

troops and making rapid movements impossible. Because of 
the extension of Sherman's line to his right, Hood's corps 
was transferred from the right to the left of the Confederate 
hne, thus placing Hardee's corps in the center. But the po- 
sition now occupied was bad, as it put the troops in a line 
parallel to Johnston's communications instead of at right angles. 
On the 22nd, at Culp's Farm, Hood, after repulsing an attack, 
injudiciously assaulted the Federal lines, defended by troops 
from Hooker's and Schofield's commands. ^^ 

The next few days were spent by Sherman in getting his 
troops into positions from which two attacks in force could 
be made which, if successful, would give to the Federals a 
positive advantage of position. The center of the Confederate 
Ime was to be attacked. The troops holding this position con- 
sisted of the left center of Hardee's corps, including Cleburne's 
and Cheatham's divisions, and the right center of Polk's 
(Loring's) corps, including French's and Featherston's di- 
visions. After a furious cannonade which was kept up all 
during the 27th, McPherson's and Thomas's troops moved 
to the attack, the most powerful assault being made by Mc- 
Pherson on the divisions of Cleburne and Cheatham. The 
attack was everywhere repulsed with heavy losses to the 
Federals, whereas the Confederate troops, some of which 
fought in intrenchments, suffered comparatively light losses. 
On the 29th a truce was agreed to, to permit the Federals 
to bury their dead. ^^ 

After the battle, General Johnston's army was re- 
enforced by the Georgia State troops, commanded by General 
Gustavus W. Smith and numbering about 3,000 effectives. ^^ 
Following the attack on Kennesaw Mountain, Sherman 
continued to move by his right flank and by the first 
week in July had moved so far that he was nearer Atlanta 
than the Confederate left. Accordingly, General Johnston 



S2 — Buck, 259; Narrative, 340; Hughes, 238; Johnston's Report, O. R., 
38, part 3:617; Hood makes no mention of this attack at Gulps Farm, in his 
book. 

33 — Sherman, 2:60; Narrative, 341-43. 

34 — G. W. Smith's Report,, O. R., 38, part 3:970; Narrative, 344. 



28 Thomas R. Hay 

transferred his army to the south of Marietta and on the line 
of the Chattahoochee River. By the 6th of July the entire 
army had withdrawn to previously selected and prepared 
positions covering the way to Atlanta. But here Sherman 
was not disposed to repeat his costly mistake by again as- 
saulting intrenched positions. Instead, he intrenched himself, 
and while part of his army took position in front of the 
Confederates, the balance was moved to the right to cross 
the river and threaten Johnston's rear or the city of Atlanta 
itself. Johnston, instead of attacking Sherman, as was 
expected, moved his army across the Chattahoochee River 
on the night of the 9th and took up a position on the high 
ground to the west of Peach Tree Creek, which empties into 
the river just to the east of the railroad bridge. Sherman 
considered that Johnston neglected a favorable opportunity 
when he failed to attack the Federals as they moved across 
the Chattahoochee River. Johnston, however, was prevented 
from actively opposing Sherman's crossing of the river by 
the width and depth and difficult character of Peach Tree 
Creek, near the point where it empties into the Chattahoo- 
chee and which his army would have had to straddle. By 
the 17th Sherman's army was entirely across the river and 
the general movement against Atlanta was begun. ^^ 

On the night of July 17 General Johnston received a 
telegram from Richmond directing him to turn over the 
command of the army to General J. B. Hood, one of his corps 
commanders, giving as a reason the failure to arrest the 
advance of the enemy to the vicinity of Atlanta, and express- 
ing a lack of confidence in his (Johnston's) ability either to 
inflict defeat or to stop the advance. ^^ On the i8th the 
command was transferred as directed, Johnston, at the same 
time, explaining in detail his plans for future operations. 
At the request of General Hood, General Johnston, during 
the next day, gave the orders which arranged the troops in 

35 — Narrative, 345-47; Sherman, 2:68-71; Steele, 1:542. 

36 — Narrative, 349; Hood, 124-25; Cooper to Johnston, July 17, 1864, O. R., 
38, part 5:885; Seddon to Hood, July 17, 1864, Ibid., 885; Johnston relinquishes 
command, July 17, 1864, Ibid., 887; Davis to Hood, July "18, 1864, Ibid., 888; 
Hood assigned to command, Ibid., 889. 



The Atlanta Campaign 29 

the selected positions and everything possible was done to 
insure the successful carrying out of the proposed opera- 
tions. ^"^ General Hood states that he and Generals Har- 
dee and A. P. Stewart repeatedly insisted that General 
Johnston "pocket that dispatch" (the President's order) and 
retain the command. Johnston makes no mention of this 
fact. President Davis declined to revoke his order. ^^ 

This change of commanders was received with depres- 
sion and dissatisfaction by the army, and with great elation 
by the enemy. ^^ Howell Cobb, who soon took over the 
command of the Georgia State troops, expressed his lack of 
security because of the change. ^^ Hardee sought to be 
relieved, only retaining his command at the earnest solicita- 
tion of President Davis. ^^ Cleburne felt that the death 
warrant of the Army of Tennessee had been signed, and 
that Hood had nothing but courage and dash to recommend 
him for the command. In conversation with a friend, at the 
time, he summed his opinion up in the statement that "we 
are going to carry the war into Africa, but I fear we will 



37 — Narrative, 350; Johnston's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:618. 

$8 — Hood, 126-27; Hood, llartlee, and A. i". Stewart to Davis, July 18, 
1864, O. R., 52, part 2:708-9; Davis to Hood, Hardee, and Stewart, Ihid., 38, 
part 5:888. Hood seems to have been overwhelmed by the responsibility of the 
position to which he had been assigned and which some, including Johnston, 
thought he had secured through intrigue. Cf. J. E. Johnston to his brother 
Beverly, Nov. 15, 1864, quoted in Some War Letters of General Joseph E. Johnston 
edited by Robert M. Hughes, Journal Military Service Institution of the United 
States, 50:326. Henceforth cited as War Letters, J. M. S. I. Johnston to Maury, 
Sept. I, 1864, quoted in D. H. Maury, Recollections of a Virginian, 147; Letter 
of Judge J. P. Young to the writer, March 28, 1921; E. A. Pollard, The Lost 
Cause, 576-77; Mrs. D. Giraud Wright, A Southern Girl in '61, 185, 195; Johnston 
to his brother Beverly, Aug. 26 and Oct. 6, 1864, quoted in War I^etters, J. M. 
S. I., 50:321 and 323. 

39 — J. D. Cox, Atlanta, 148. Henceforth cited as Cox, Atlanta. Buck, 265; 
DuBose, 360-64; J. B. Gordon, Reminiscences of the Civil War, 132; James H. 
Wilson, Life of John A. Rawlins, 247; Letter of July 26, 1864, qiioted in Home 
Letters of General Sherman, 304; C. F. Adams, to Henry Adams, July 25, 1864, 
quoted in A Cycle of Adams Letters, 2:169; Correspondent, Pittsburgh Gazette 
Times, Aug. 12, 1864. Contemporary letters and newspapers which have been ex- 
amined are the unimpeachable evidence on which this statement is based. The 
writer has written a critical examination of this controversy under the title of 
The Hood-Davis-Johnston Controversy of 1864 and it is expected it will soon be 
published. 

40 — Howell Cobb to his wife, July 22, 1864, quoted in U. B. Phillips, 
"Correspondence of Toombs, Stephens and Cobb," Annual Report American 
Historical Association, 191 1, 2:648. 

41 — Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:697; Hardee to Mackall, Aug. 24, 
1864, O. R., 38, part 5:987; Hardee to Davis, Aug. 3, 1864, Ihid. 987; Davis to 
Hardee, Aug. 4, 1864, Ibid., 988; Hardee to Davis, Aug. 6, 1864, Ibid., 988; 
Davis to Hardee, Aug. 7, 1864, Ibid., 988; Cox, Atlanta, 181. 



30 Thomas R. Hay 

not be as successful as Scipio was." Other Confederate 
officers expressed a similar opinion. ^ General Sherman 
considered that *'at the critical moment the Confederate 
government rendered us a most valuable service" by relieving 
Johnston. Other Federal commanders were of the same 
opinion. ^^ General Robert E. Lee had opposed Hood's 
appointment, characterizing him as a bold fighter, but ex- 
pressing doubt as to the ''other qualities necessary." He 
preferred Hardee for the commander, if a change was to be 
made, though he seems rather to have endeavored to caution 
President Davis against making a hasty change than to have 
been disposed to make any specific recommendations, unless 
requested. ^'^ He had a high opinion of the military 
qualities of General Johnston, ^'^ whom he had known 
since they were cadets together at West Point. General 
Johnston, on his part, maintained that had Hardee or Stewart 
succeeded him Atlanta would have been held. ^^ 

The weight of authority favors the view that Johnston's 
retreat was a master-stroke of military tactics and strategy, 
and that his removal from command was a grave calamity 
to the Confederacy, and one of the worst of the many blunders 
committed byjeflferson Davis in his delusion that he possessed 
good military judgment. To a certain extent the attitude 
of the Richmond authorities was excusable. Johnston, es- 
tranged from them while serving them ably and with perfect 
fidelity, maintained always a more or less sullen, unfriendly, 
and distant attitude. Though reporting his movements with 
exactness, he retained, throughout, an irritating and, at 
times, embarrassing attitude of silence with regard to future 
plans and expectations. Perhaps a little frankness and sym- 
pathy, on his part, toward Bragg and Davis, as to the 



42 — C. E. Nash, Biographical Sketches of General Patrick R. Cleburne and 
General T. C. Hindman, 159-60. 

43 — W. T. Sherman in B & L, 4:253; O. O. Howard, Autobiography, 1:605; 
O. O. Howard in B & L, 4:313; J. D. Cox, Reminiscences of the Civil War, 2:275; 
Sherman, 2:72; G. G. Meade to his wife, July 17, 1864, quoted in Life and Letter* 
of General Meade, 2:214, 

44 — Lee's Confidential Dispatches to Davis, 282, 284, 285. 

45 — ^J- B. Gordon, Reminiscences of the Civil War, 132. 

46 — ^J. E. Johnston in B & L, 4:277. 



The Atlanta Campaign 31 

general expectations and purposes of his operations, would 
have kept Johnston in his place as commander of the army 
and somewhat made amends for his apparent lack of 
success. ^^ 

Johnston's policy was not purely defensive. He in- 
sisted on delaying the campaign, both on account of the 
impending political campaign in the North and to draw 
Sherman as far as possible from his base of operations. He 
proposed to turn on his opponent only when all factors were 
in his favor, and hoped and watched for a favorable oppor- 
tunity. His first chance came at Cassville, but no attack was 
made because of the reluctance of some of his subordinate 
commanders to risk a pitched battle. The second opportunity 
came before Atlanta, on the eve of his relief from command. 
Up to the time of his removal, Johnston had been generally 
successful in carrying out his plans. His troops were in 
good spirits and believed in him, and daily Sherman's 
position was becoming more difficult and precarious. ^^ 
In connection with this removal of General Johnston it is 
interesting to note that this officer was relieved of his com- 
mand for doing in Georgia the very thing that Lee in Virginia 
had done, that is, falling back upon the post he was set 
to defend, while his adversary, at a constantly increasing 
disadvantage and suffering large losses in men and materials, 
was no nearer to beating and destroying his army or reaching 
and occupying his objective. In the one case it was known 



47— Narrative, 365 ff; E. A. Pollard, The Lost Cause, 543; J- D- Cox, 
Reminiscences of the Civil War, 2:275; R & F, 2:e,A7^; Hood, chapters IV to IX; 
Davis to Phelan, Mar. i, 1865, O. R., 47, Part 2:1303-11. 

48 — There is much contemporary evidence in favor of Johnston. Cf. C. H. 
Stevens to Johnston, July 20, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:890; Mackall's Journal, O. 
R., 38, part 3:983, 985, 989, 991; Major F. H. Wigfall, A. D. C. to General Hood, 
to his sister, July 31, i864, quoted in Wright, 182; Harrison to Davis, Aug. 26, 
1864, O. R., 52, part 2:726; vS. G. French to Davis, Sept. 14, 1864, O. R., 39, part 
2:836; reports of Federal scouts, T. J. Wood to J. S. Fullerton, O. R., 38, part 
5 '282; The letters of many prominent men, and news items and editorials in the 
daily press of the period, fail to disclose any "clamor" for Johnston's removal. 
This' clamor centered mainly in Richmond among the bomb-proof politicians and 
their adherents. Cf. Mrs. Judith W. McQuiston, Diary of a Southern Refugee, 
entry Sept. 10, 1864, 302-4; R & F, 2:556-57; J. B. Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's 
Diary, entry Sept. 3, 1864, 2:277; M. B. Chesnut, A Diary from Dixie, entry* 
July 25, 1864, 315; J. E. Brown to Davis, July 5, 1864, O. R., 39, part 2:688; 
Cobb to Seddon, July i, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:858; DuBose. 362-63. 



32 Thomas R/Hay 

that Lee would defend the point committed to his charge to 
the very best of his abihty, whereas in the other no such as- 
surance was present. 

Johnston's successor, Hood, was appointed in the behef 
that he would take a more energetic course. This officer 
had been free in his criticism of his commander and had 
accused him of neglecting several favorable opportunities to 
strike Sherman a decisive blow. ^^ Hood had courage, 
but never great skill in execution, and in every battle after 
his appointment to the command he was defeated. General 
Hood was known to the Federal commander as a fighter. 
Sherman was pleased with the change, as he had an army 
superior in numbers and equipment. Now that he had an 
antagonist whose policy it was to attack rather than to re- 
treat, thus drawing his opponent farther from his base and 
lengthening an already long line of communications, Sher- 
man could confidently expect that the summer campaign 
would be carried out on open ground and that he would not 
be under the necessity of attacking prepared positions. ^^ 

The rank and file of the Confederate army appreciated 
Johnston's difficulties and the reasons for his tactics, but 
this opinion was not shared by President Davis and his 
associates. ^^ In fact, General Bragg's conduct was in 
marked contrast to Johnston's actions under similar circum- 
stances, though reversed, after Murfreesboro in January, 



49 — Hood to Bragg, July 14, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:879- 

SO — Sherman, 2:72; Sherman in B & L, 4:253- 

51 — On the other hand, General Lee (Lee's Dispatches, 282-84), Governor 
J. E. Brown o£ Georgia, (Brown to Davis, July 5, 1864, O. R., 39. part 2:688; 
Governor J. E. Brown to Georgia General Assembly, March 9, 1865, in Con- 
federate Records of the State of Georgia, 2:869), General Howell Cobb, (Cobb to 
Seddon, July i, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:858), General Robert Toombs, (P. A. 
Stovall, Robert Toombs, quoting a letter written about July 18 or 19, 1864), and 
others, opposed a change of commanders. Federal scouts reported the "dissatis- 
faction" that prevailed "among the common soldiery because of Davis's action." 
(T. J. Wood to Fullerton, July 29, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:282). Major Calhoun 
Benham, Chief of Staff to General Cleburne, in a sketch of General Cleburne, 
published in the Kennesaw Gazette, Sept. 15, 1889, wrote: ". . The effect" of 
Johnston's removal "upon the army was not good. General Johnston had lifted 
the army from the slough of despond in which Bragg had left it; he had re- 
organized it; he had provided for it well (and) it was believed he had never 
retreated except upon solid reasons . . . He was believed to be a soldier of solid 
abilities." 



'JThe Atlanta Campaign 33 

1863. ^^ The logic of Johnston's removal was that the 
Confederate army must take the offensive. It is said that 
the President made the change of commanders with reluct- 
ance and only because of great popular and political pres- 
sure. ^^ Certain it is that the relations between Johnston and 
Davis had never been very cordial. In reply to the President's 
frequent inquiries, through General Bragg and direct to 
Johnston himself, as to plans and policies, Johnston returned 
no answers at all or only vague and evasive ones. ^^' It 
is vain to speculate as to what might have happened had 
Johnston been left in command. Had Lee been commander- 
in-chief of the armies of the Confederacy Johnston would not 
have been removed, as is evident from Lee's letter to Davis 
at the time the matter was under consideration^^ and also 
by his action in restoring Johnston to command of the army 
on his (Lee's) becoming commander-in-chief in February, 
1865. Johnston on his part was not so just. ^'^ The 
skill, the prudence mixed with daring, with which he held 
every position in front of Sherman until the last possible 
moment and then slipped away, without loss, without disaster, 
is worthy of a Lee or a Jackson. Yet it is not unlikely that, 
in such a long retreat, a Lee or a Jackson would have found 
opportunities for dealing crushing blows. Admirable in re- 
treat and on the defensive, it does not seem that Johnston 
was ever an offensive fighter in the truest meaning of the 
term. ^^ 

The price of Hood's position was action, as had been the 
case with Bragg after Shiloh. And action there was to be 



52 — Johnston to Davis, Feb. 3 and 12, 1863, O. R., 23, part 2:624 and 632; 
Davis to Johnston, Feb. 19, 1863, Ibid., 64o; Johnston to Davis, March 2, 1863, 
O. R., 52, part 2:816 

55 — E. P. Alexander, Military Memoirs of a Confederate, 575. Hence- 
forth cited as Alexander; W. E. Dodd, Jefferson Davis, 332-33; Narrative, 360-62; 
J. D. Cox, Reminiscences of the Civil War, 2:272; "Private and Official Papers 
of Jefferson Davis," edited by Dunbar Rowland, Harpers, 124:102; quoting letter, 
Davis to Lyons, Aug. 13, 1876 and J. P. Benjamin to Davis, Feb. 15, 1879; A. L. 
S., James Lyons to W. T. Walthall, July 31, 1876, in Confederate Museum, 
Richmond, Va.; letter of Oct. 12, 1878, by B. H. Hill, quoted in R &. F, 2:557-61. 

54 — Bragg to Davis, July 15, 18^4, O. R., 38, part 5:881; Davis to Johnston, 
July 16, 1864, Ibid., 882; Johnston to Davis, Ibid., 883. 

55 — Lee's Dispatches, 284. 

56 — Johnston to Davis, July 18, 1864, O. R., 38, part 5:888; Narrative, 349. 

57 — Ale.vander, 577; Cox, Reminiscences, 2:277. 



34 Thomas R. Hay 

with a vengeance. General John Bell Hood, as a fighter and 
as a man, was one of the truest and bravest that ever 
wore a uniform. As a leader in many bloody fights, maimed 
by wounds received at Gettysburg and Chickamauga, he had 
acquired a reputation for daring initiative and unflinching 
bravery and determination in lall circumstances. As a fighter, 
he was second to none in a galaxy of associates who have come 
down to us, all of them, as brave men and true. But these 
qualities were at once his strength and his weakness — 2. 
strength in fighting against odds and in unfavorable circum- 
stances, but a weakness in depriving him of that caution of 
movement and maneuver which had characterized his prede- 
cessor and which, under many conditions, is most essential 
to success. Judgment, and a nice sense of proportion, must be 
added to the initiative natural to a brave and fearless spirit, 
if success is to be achieved, and especially is this the case 
when handicapped by resources and position as was the 
lot of the Confederate forces opposing Sherman's advance. 

On the evening of the 19th of July the Federal troops 
were arranged, in general, with Schofield on the right, Thomas 
in the center, ;and McPherson on the left. The troops were 
widely dispersed, but were planning to cross over Peach Tree 
Creek the next day, and after concentrating a vigorous move- 
ment against Atlanta was to be begun. To meet this movement, 
General Hood decided to carry out the plan proposed and 
communicated to him by General Johnston, and strike the 
enemy while in the act of executing the intended maneuver. 
The plan was to attack General Thomas's command before 
it could intrench or be re-enforced. 

The Confederate army was drawn up on the south side 
of Peach Tree Creek, with Stewart's corps on the left, Har- 
dee's in the center, and Hood's old corps, under Cheatham, 
on the right. Each corps was to hold a division in reserve, 
but owing to pressure by the enemy against Cheatham's 



IThe Atlanta Campaign 35 

right, this command was directed to extend a division front 
to the right, the interval vacated to be filled equally by 
Hardee and Stewart. The Confederate attack was ordered 
to begin at i p.m. on July 20, but owing to time lost 
in getting into position, it was delayed three hours. ■''^ 
By this time Thomas had crossed his troops to the south 
side of Peach Tree Creek and had had some time in which 
to intrench, though he says that this was not done, and to 
get his Itroops fixed in selected positions. ^^ Stewart a^r 
tacked first, with only partial success, but was later driven 
back to his original position by an enfilade fire from the 
Federal lines, made possible by Hardee's delay in attack- 
ing. ^^ Hardee's left division, under General W. H. T. 
Walker, attacked and was badly cut up. At this juncture 
Cleburne's division, which was in reserve, was ordered to 
move in to Walker's position and continue the attack, but just 
as preparations for a forward movement had been com- 
pleted, an order was received from General Hood directing 
Hardee to move a division to the extreme right of the line 
and support Wheeler's cavalry command, which was being 
pushed back by superior forces of Federal infantry under 
McPherson. Cleburne's division, being in reserve and not 
having been engaged, was naturally the one to go. ^'^ 
Five minutes more and it would have been too late. Cle- 
burne would have been engaged. After these failures to 
accomplish anything of moment, notwithstanding the fact 
that for a time there was quite a gap between Thomas and 
Schofield, on his right, and because of the late hour, General 
Hood ordered his troops to withdraw to their former posi- 
tions. ^^ 

Many accusations have resulted from the failure to 
accomplish anything of consequence as a result of the day's 



58 — Hood, 105, 166-71; Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:630. 
59 — Thomas's Report, O, R., 38, part 1:156. 
60 — Stewart's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:871. 
61 — Hardee's Report, Ibid., 698; Buck, 270. 

62 — Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631; Hardee's Report, Ibid., 699; Sher- 
jan, 2:72; O. O. Howard, Autobiography, i :6o7. 



2,6 Thomas R. Hay 

operations. Hardee is blamed for the failure because of 
not carrying out Hood's specific instructions. Here again, 
poor staff work seems to have been one of the primary 
causes for failure. Another cause was the fact that Cheat- 
ham's troops seem to have moved farther to the right than 
was originally intended or expected, due to continued pres- 
sure by McPherson. This shifting movement of Cheatham's 
increased the interval that Hardee was to fill, and caused 
him to move more to the right than was expected, in order 
not to lose contact. Stewart, in turn, was also compelled to 
move farther to the right than was originally ordered, this 
causirig some confusion and no little delay. ^^ 

The result of Hardee's movement to the right was to 
oppose one Federal division (Newton's), "2,700 men in 
line," to Hardee's entire corps of four divisions, totaling 
some 14,000 men. ^^^ Stewart, with three small divisions, 
was thus opposed to four Federal divisions (Ward's, Geary's, 
and Williams's divisions of the 20th corps and R. W. 
Johnson's of the 14th corps), totaling 16,682 men. ^^ 
General Newton stated in his report that he "did not have 
half enough men to hold the ground assaulted (by Har*- 
dee) even in one line." ^^ Stewart formed with Loring's 
division on the right and Walthall on his left, with French 
in reserve, some 11,000 men. The heaviest fighting was done 
by Loring's division of Stewart's corps and Walker's di- 
vision of Hardee's corps. ^"^ 

Loring and Walthall moved forward gallantly, the former 
carrying the Federal works in his front, but later being com- 



63 — Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631; Hardee's Report, Ibid., 6q8; 
Stewart's Report, Ibid., 871; T. B. Roy, "General Hardee and the Military 
Ooerations around Atlanta," S. H. S., 8:348: Henceforth cited as Roy, S. H. S.; 
AWxander, 577. 

64 — Newton's Report, O. R., 38, part 1:290; Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, 
part 3:698; Abstract of Return of Army of Tennessee, July 10, 1864, Ibid., 679. 

65 — "Abstract from return showing effective strength" of Sherman's army 
^lay 31 and June 20, 1864, O. R., 38, part 1:115; Thomas's Report, Ibid., 156; 
R. W. Johnson's Report, Ibid., 525; Itinerary of the 14th Army Corps, entry 
July 20, 1864, Ibid., 507. 

66 — Newton's Report, O. R., 38, part i :29o. 

6/ — Abstract of Return Army of Tennessee, July 10, 1864, O. R., 38, part 
3:679; Stewart's Report, Ibid., 871; Loring's Report, Ibid., 876-77; Featherston's 
Report, Ibid., 882; T. M. Scott's Report, Ibid., 895; Walthall's Report, Ibid., 925; 
Hardee's Report, Ibid., 698, 



The Atlanta Campaign 37 

pelled to withdraw because of the enfilade fire from his right. 
His losses were heavy. Walthall, far outflanked on his left, 
was unable to do much more than hold in position. In 
Hardee's corps, Walker's division, as mentioned, was the 
only division seriously engaged. Cleburne was withdrawn as 
he was about to move to the attack. Maney's division was 
only slightly engaged. Bate, moving to the east to attack 
Newton's division in flank and rear, "got lost" and was 
unable to get into position before dark. ^^ 

General Hardee did not intend that Loring should move 
to the right beyond the point originally fixed, it being in- 
tended to fill the interval that would have existed between 
the two divisions with a line of skirmishers. Orders were 
issued to this effect, but through some misunderstanding, the 
staff officer designated to attend to the matter failed to give 
the information, and by the time General Hardee's plans 
could be learned General Loring' s troops had moved to the 
right and it was too late to make any change. General 
Stewart was of the opinion that "had the plan of battle, as 
I understood it, been carried out fully, we would have 
achieved a great success." ^^ 

It is true that General Hardee did not obey Hood's 
"specific instructions," and that he moved one and one half 
to two miles to the right instead of one half a division 
front, but it is also true that Cheatham made no arrange- 
ments to cover the interval vacated by his move. Hardee 
felt "the hazard" too great to leave "an interval .... of 
one and one half miles intended to be continuous and at a 
point in front of which the enemy was in force . . . ." In 
Hood's absence he determined to cover this interval. ~^ 



68 — Stewart's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:87^ Loring's Report, Ibid., 876; 
Featherston's Report, Ibid., 882; Walthall's Report, Ibid., 925-26; Hood, 169; 
O. O. Howard in <B & L, 4:314; Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, pai-t 3:698-99; 
Letter of Judge J. P. Young, Memphis, Tenn., to the writer, June 6, 1918. 

69 — Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:698; Stewart's Report, Ibid., 871; 
Loring's Report, Ibid., S76; Roy, S. H. S., 8:347-48. 

70 — Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:698; Stewart's Report, Ibid., 871; 
Hood, 168. 



3^ Thomas R. Hay 

While it certainly cannot be said that Hardee was 
entirely to blame for the failure on the 20th, he was, in a 
measure, responsible for the lack of a complete success. He 
does not seem to have made the best use of his forces at 
the point of superiority, vi^.^ in front of Newton's small 
division. The necessity for shifting to the right not only 
caused a three hour delay (the attack was planned for i 
P.M. and did not begin until 4 p.m.), but on account of 
the wooded ground the troops were broken up and, in the 
case of Bate, actually ''got lost" for a time. No operations 
on a large scale can have much hope of success when begun 
in the late hours of the afternoon, unless the attack is 
irresistible and successful from the first. Even then, the 
enemy, under cover of night, can usually escape and consoli- 
date, in selected positions, hidden in the darkness. This was 
true at Chickamauga on the second day, when darkness 
intervened to save the Federal troops under Thomas and 
allowed them to make good their retreat to chosen positions. 
In each of the battles of July 20 and 22, the attack was be- 
gun too late to hold out any great chance of a decisive suc- 
cess, and in each case, the lack of definite, detailed infor- 
mation on the part of the commander-in-chief of the Con- 
federate army was, in the last analysis, responsible, the burden 
of this responsibility being emphasized by the failure to 
build up any capable and efficient staff organization. In con- 
nection with Hood's discussion of the battle of the 20th, it is 
interesting to note that neither in his report nor in his book 
does he make any mention of the withdrawal of Cleburne's 
division, at the most critical period of Hardee's attack, as 
made, with its effect on Hardee's plans for an attack in 
force. '^^ 

After being withdrawn, Cleburne's division marched 
back through Atlanta and on to assigned positions on the 
extreme right of the Confederate line. He got into position 
about midnight. Hood in the meanwhile advising Wheeler of 



7/ — Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:630 ff; Hardee's Report, Ibid., 699. 



The Atlanta Campaign 39 

Cleburne's coming and urging him "to hold on". All during 
the next day, the 21st, in fighting which Cleburne spoke of 
as "the bitterest in his life," his troops faced a strong and 
active enemy. Unable to advance, because of the rugged 
and wooded character of the ground, outclassed in artillery 
and numbers, the hot and oppressive July day was passed in 
defensive fighting, repelling charges and unable to react, and 
enduring a harassing, deadly, and, at times, enfilading fire from 
small arms and powerful artillery. General Hood makes no 
mention of the bitter fighting of this day in either his report 
or his book, Advance and Retreat. ^^ 

During the night of the 20th Hood had received infor- 
mation of the exposed position of the Federal left under 
McPherson. The movements of these Federal troops 
threatened Hood's communications and, if continued, would 
either have forced the abandonment of Atlanta or a fight. 
Hood decided on the latter, and during the night of the 21st 
he withdrew his troops into previously selected and prepared 
positions about Atlanta. Sherman's troops were still scat- 
tered and he had thought it necessary to caution McPherson 
against extending too far to his left. "^^ 

During the 21st Hood had summoned his corps com- 
manders and had issued minute and detailed instructions for 
the operations of the next day. Stewart, Cheatham, and 
G. W. Smith, with the Georgia State troops, were ordered 
to occupy the prepared intrenched positions in front of Atlanta. 
Hardee's corps was selected to make the move against 
the exposed Federal left, because his troops were presumed 
(erroneously) to be fresh; because his was the largest corps; 
and because of his extended experience as a corps com- 
mander. Wheeler, with his cavalry, was to move on Hardee's 
right and attack with him. As soon as McPherson was forced 
back, Cheatham, from the Atlanta front, was to move by his 
right and attack, and the battle was to be taken up by Stewart, 
formed on Cheatham's left. '^ 



72 — Buck, 270; Roy, S. H. S., 8:253. 

75 — Hood, 173-74; Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631; Sherman, 2:72-74. 

74 — Hood^ 174-76; Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631. 



40 I'homas R. Hay 

The movement, though admirably conceived, did not 
provide for certain contingencies. First, though it was only 
six miles in a direct line to Decatur, Hardee's objective, his 
troops had to make a detour of some fifteen miles to get into 
position ; second, Hardee's troops were not fresh, as stated 
by Hood, but were wearied from two days of hard marching 
and fighting; and third, instead of finding the Federal left 
"in the air" and unprotected, as did Jackson at Chancellors- 
ville, McPherson, during the night, had bent his line back 
at an angle facing south and had erected hasty earthworks 
and abattis. ~^ 

Cleburne could not be withdrawn from his position on 
Bald Hill until late the night of the 2ist. He had been di- 
rected to withdraw at dark and at i a. m. was ordered to 
follow Walker's division. The original plan of moving to and 
through Decatur and attacking the Federal rear had been 
abandoned, because of the condition of the troops and because 
of the long march that would have been necessary, and it 
was planned for Hardee to move to Cobb's Mills, to the 
southeast of Atlanta, and strike the enemy in flank. '^^' 
Hood afterward severely criticised Hardee, saying that he 
"failed to entirely turn the enemy's flank as directed; took 
position and attacked his flank." ~^ Because of the scat- 
tered condition of Hardee's troops and the impossibility 
of moving any of them until concealed by darkness, it was 
manifestly impossible to expect that they could march fifteen 
miles to Decatur and attack at dawn. ~^ These facts are in 
themselves evidence that it had been agreed that Hardee 
was not to try to gain McPherson's rear at Decatur, but 
was to attack him in flank, though Hood in his report 
and in his book seems to have forgotten the physical facts 
of time and distance, and that he had told his Chief of Stafif, 



75 — Cox, Atlanta, 176; Roy, S. H. S., 8:356; Buck, 274; Hardee's Report, 
O. R., 38, part 3:699; Lowry's Report, Ibid., 732; Govan's Report, Ibid., 7^7 ■ 
76— Roy, S. H. S., 8:357; Hardee's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:699. 
77 — Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631. 
78— Hood, 177; Roy, S. H. S., 8:357. 



The Atlanta Campaign 41 

General W. W. Mackall, on receiving Hardee's dispatch 
informing him of his dispositions for the attack: "Hardee 
is just where I wanted him." "^^ 

The plan of attack as finally adopted was vigorously and 
successfully carried out, and took McPherson completely by 
surprise. ^^ Wearied by the long march, and somewhat 
disorganized in passing through heavily wooded country, 
Hardee did not get his troops into line until late in the 
morning of the 22nd. The advance was begun about 
noon,^^ the troops forming in line with Cleburne on the left, 
Cheatham (Maney) next, and Walker and Bate, in order, 
on the right. Cleburne's and Maney's divisions, on the left 
and under cover of a forest, struck the works which Mc- 
Pherson had thrown back, facing east and on a line perpen- 
dicular to his main line for the protection of his rear, and 
doubled up this flank, while the remainder of the corps 
turned and took the main Federal intrenchments in reverse, 
the enemy facing about in these intrenchments to repel the 
attack. ^^ Meanwhile the divisions of Walker and Bate, 
having to gain farther to McPherson's rear, unexpectedly 
encountered the i6th corps, which had been in reserve and 
which was then moving from Decatur toward Atlanta to 
noon'*^ the troops forming in line with Cleburne on the left, 
These troops had only to face to the left to meet the attack 
of Hardee's advancing troops, which had to pass over open 
ground in full view of the waiting foe. Walker and Bate 
were repulsed and an attack on McPherson's rear was ef- 
fectually prevented. ^^ 

The original plan of attack, as mentioned, provided that 
Cheatham and Stewart, on the left of the line, should move 
to the attack as soon as Hardee should become engaged. 
But Cheatham did not attack until 3 p.m. (General Sherman 



/Q — Hood's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:631; Hardee's Report, Ibid., 699; 
Hood, 176-79; Roy, S. H. S., 8:359. 
80 — Steele, 1:544. 

81 — Govan's Report, O. R., 38, part 3:737. 

82 — Logan's Report, Ibid., 22; Roy, S. H. S., 8:360; Sherman, 2:80. 
83 — Sherman, 2:74; Howard in B Si L, 4:317; Roy, 5. H. S., 8:361.. 



42 Thomas R. Hay 

says 4 p.m.), and then only after Federal troops had been 
moved from his front to re-enforce the troops opposing 
Hardee. Hardee had been checked and was being heavily 
pressed, even before Cheatham advanced, thus allowing the 
troops withdrawn from Cheatham's front to be returned. 
General Sherman says that though McPherson's Army of 
the Tennessee was hard pressed and frequently in danger, 
he was not re-enforced, though troops for doing so were 
available. Sherman says this was not done because *T knew 
that the attacking force could only be a part of Hood's 
army, and that if any assistance were rendered by either of 
the other armies (Cumberland and Ohio), the Army of the 
Tennessee would be jealous." As matters turned out, Mc- 
pherson was able to hold his own- but if the pressure by 
Hardee had, resulted successfully and McPherson had been 
decisively thrown back and defeated, there might not have 
been time to bring up re-enforcements. Such reprehensible 
sentiment as that expressed by Sherman might have had dis- 
astrous results.^'^ 

Night closed with Hardee in possession of the field. 
The losses on both sides had been heavy, in this, the bloodiest 
fight of the Atlanta campaign. General McPherson had been 
killed about noon by skirmishers from Cleburne's division, 
as he was proceeding to General F. P. Blair's line of the 
17th corps, by a road which, until the moment, had been 
clear. On the Confederate side. General W. H. T. Walker, 
commanding a division in Hardee's corps, was killed, gal- 
lantly leading his division in a charge against the i6th 
corps. Because of the heavy losses sustained by this di- 
vision it was soon afterward broken up and distributed 
throughout the army. 

General Hood, deeply chagrined at the failure of his 
plans, sought to place the blame upon General Hardee, ac- 
cusing him of not having begun the attack at daylight, as 



84— Hood, 180; Sherman, 2:80-81; Roy, S. H. S., 8:361; Hood's Report, 
O. R., 38, part 3:631; Hardee's Report, Ibid., 699; Stewart's Report, Ibtd., 
871-73. 



The Atlanta Campaign 43 

planned, and for not having completely turned McPherson's 
flank. These charges, as we have seen, were unjust. First, 
it was a physical impossibility, under the circumstances, for 
Hardee to have got into position to attack at daylight; 
second, it was expected to find the Federal left flank "in 
the air" instead of strongly placed behind intrenchments ; 
third, the fortuitous position of the i6th corps prevented 
Hardee's right from successfully carrying out its movement 
against the Federal rear. But another reason, for which 
Hood himself was directly responsible, was the delay in 
Cheatham's attack and the failure to properly use these troops 
and the massed artillery at this point, to prevent Sherman 
from withdrawing troops to re-enforce his hard-pressed left. 
Hardee's attack was vigorous and persistent and was made 
as early as could be expected. His work, viewed as a piece 
of military maneuvering, was of the best, and was greatly 
superior to the commanding general's handling of the army. 
The conduct of the officers and men in this day's battle does 
not sustain Hood in his contention that Hardee's was "a timid 
offensive," and that the troops lacked "spirit." Their actions 
completely refute these charges. ^^ At Kennesaw Mountain, 
in the preceding month, Cleburne's troops had, from behind 
intrenchments, repelled assaults from these same Federal 
troops that, on July 22nd, with conditions exactly reversed, 
were driven from works equally strong. The loss of 27 out 
of 30 field ofiicers, in Cleburne's command, attests to the gal- 
lantry and persistence of his assaults. 

[to be concluded in JUNE issue] 



8s — Hood, 1S3, 191. 



THE YAMASSEE REVOLT OF 1597 AND THE 

DESTRUCTION OF THE GEORGIA MISSIONS 

By J. G. Johnson, M. A. 

UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA 

Georgia, known to the Spaniards as Guale, was a 
province of Florida during the latter part of the sixteenth 
century and throughout the entire seventeenth century. 
Only a few months after the founding of St. Augustine, 
Menendez hastened north, and after establishing friendly re- 
lations with the Indians of the Georgia coast, he left garri- 
sons on St. Catharines Island, known during this period as 
Guale Island or Santa Catalina de Guale, and on Cumberland 
Island (San Pedro). This occurred during the summer of 
1566. Farmers were soon settled around the presidios, and 
two years later Jesuit missionaries came over to look after 
the spiritual welfare of the Spaniards and Indians. Their 
labors proving fruitless, the Jesuits moved to Santa Elena 
(South Carolina), where their lack of success was just as 
pronounced as it had been in Guale. A number of them 
then went to Axacan (Virginia) and there met death at the 
hands of hostile Indians. Whereupon every Jesuit in 
Florida — and Spanish Florida included all the vast area be- 
tween the Mississippi and the Atlantic, with a vague and 
indefinite northern boundary — forsook the land in a body for 
Lower California and the Pacific slope region of Mexico. 

Thereafter, although the coast settlements were extended 
to all the more important islands, for two decades Georgia 
was thought to be extremely undesirable as a field for the 
labors of the religious orders. The Jesuits never again sent 
missionaries to the Florida provinces, and the task of de- 
veloping the mission system to a high degree of efficiency in 
this region fell to the lot of the Franciscans. Apparently the 
first Franciscans to reach Florida came over in 1573, but 
after the death of Menendez the following year, thte temporal 
as Well as the spiritual needs of the settlers of Georgia re- 



The Yamassee Revolt 45 

ceived little attention for a period of more than twenty years. 
Probably the few ''religious" who braved the rigors and 
dangers of Florida during this period, confined their attention 
to the Indians of the neighborhood of St. Augustine. Per- 
haps not one missionary made his way north of Cumberland 
Island during these years. 

However, the Spaniard of this and the following cen- 
tury was deeply religious. In the asientos, or agreements 
concerning the ways and means of planting colonies, the 
stipulation was always included that the conversion of the 
natives should be carefully looked after. The Spaniards 
early found that control over the savages could be maintained 
most easily where they were brought together in the missions, 
since by this means, the labor of the natives could be ex- 
ploited and the danger of uprisings and revolts could be min- 
imized. 

Although the period from 1573 to 1593 was devoid of 
any extensive missionary activity, there was one notable 
exception to the stagnation that threatened Florida. This was 
the establishment of the San Pedro mission on San Pedro 
Island. It possessed the advantage of being near St. Augus- 
tine, and enjoyed the protection of a garrison maintained on 
the same island. 

The revival came in 1593. During that year the Council 
of the Indies granted permission to twelve Franciscans to 
enter Florida. The following year Pedro de Corpa, Miguel 
de Auilon, Francisco de Velascola, Bias Rodriguez, and An- 
tonio de Badajoz were sent to Quale. They arrived at an op- 
portune time. The Quale Indians had rebelled against the 
Spaniards, and so dangerous had their hostility become that 
the soldiers of the small garrisons found it impossible to 
leave the stockades to secure provisions.^ 

The priests established their missions on the islands of 
the Georgia coast, where they, by means of ''entreaties, gifts, 



I — Barcia Carbillido y Zufiiga (Cardenas), Ensayo chronologico para la 
historia general de la Florida . . . (Madrid, 1723), year 1594, p. 167. 



46 J. G. Johnson 

soft words, and the great example of their work," gradually 
pacified the unruly natives. For more than two years they 
carried on their ministrations unmolested. The northernmost 
missions were those of Father Corpa at Tolomato, and 
Father Rodriguez at Torpiqui on Ossabaw Island, and that 
of Father Aufion at Assopo on Guale Island.^ Velascola and 
Davilla founded missions at Asao and Ospo on St. Simons 
and Jekyl Islands respectively. 

In 1597 a young chief of the province of Guale, annoyed 
by the reprimands of Father Corpa, apostasized from the 
faith and instigated the Indians to revolt.^ Gathering a group 
of malcontents, he advised them to go with him into the 
interior where they could enjoy the liberty to which they had 
been accustomed before the coming of the missionaries. This 
they did, but after a few days of contemplation over their 
grievances,' real and imaginary, they decided to return and 
kill Father Corpa. As an argument in favor of this step, the 
chief predicted that if they did not kill the missionaries, the 
Spaniards would come in force and deprive them of their 
liberty and lands, the first step to which was the coming of 
the Franciscans, who, while talking of peace, were preparing 
to make themselves their masters. He further told them 
that after the missionaries were dead, it would be an easy 
matter to kill the soldiers, and only in that way could their 
liberty be preserved.^ Following this advice the horde of 



2 — According to Juan de Torqueniada, Monarchia Indiana (Madrid, 1723), 
iii, 350, Assopo was on Guale Island. Tolomato and Torpiqui were not on this island 
but were not far distant since the revolted Indians, traveling from north to south 
were thoroughly acquainted with the topography and natives of the vicinity. Further- 
more, the two northern missions were near Santa Elena (the region bordering on 
Port Royal Sound). [A. M. Brooks (ed.). The Unwritten History of old St. 
Augustine (St. Augustine, 1909?), p. 35] The most exact method of locating the 
missions is by a minvite examination of the contemporary accounts. The distances 
of the establishments from St. Augustine, as well as from each other, are given in 
most cases, and this makes possible the identification of the various mission sites 
with a fair degree of certainty, 

3 — The account of the revolt is taken from Barcia, Ensayo Chronologico 
and Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana. These two accounts are substantially in 
agreement. Furthermore, the testimony taken at the subsequent trial of the lead- 
ers of the uprising apparently substantiates the truthfulness of the two accounts and 
sheds some additional light on these remote occurrences. This testimony has 
been translated and may be found in Brooks, Unwritten History of old St. 
Augustine, pp. 40-47. 

4 — Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana, iii, 351. 



The Yamassee Revolt 47 

hostile warriors, armed with bows and arrows and wearing 
large head-dresses of feathers, returned to the Christian 
Indians. 

Going to Tolomato at night, the rebels concealed them- 
selves in the church. At daybreak, when Father Corpa 
opened the door of his house, they killed him, cut off his 
head, and placed it on a stick, which in turn was tied to a 
post. Several of the natives of the settlement now joined the 
party of the rebellious chief. On the f ollowing day the 
young Indian collected his followers, and according to the 
chronicler of the affair, harangued them thus : 

"Now the father is dead, but he would not have been 
if he had allowed us to live as we did before we be- 
came Christians. Let us return to our former cus- 
toms, and prepare to defend ourselves against the 
punishment which the governor of Florida will try 
to inflict upon us, for if he succeeds in it, he will be 
as rigorous for this one father as though we had 
made an end of them all, for he will surely persecute 
us for the father we have killed the same as for all."^ 
The suggestion that the surviving Franciscans be put 
to death was approved, and the leader continued: 

''They take away our women, leaving us only one in 
perpetuity, and prevent us from trading her; they 
interfere with our dances, banquets, foods, cere- 
monies, fires, and wars, in order that, by not practic- 
ing them we shall lose our ancient valor and skill, 
inherited from our ancestors ; they persecute our old 
men, calling them magicians ; even our work troubles 
them, for they try to order us to lay it aside on some 
days ; and even when we do everything that they say, 
they are not satisfied ; all they do is to reprimand us, 
oppress us, preach to us, insult us, call us bad 
Christians, and take away from us all the happiness 
that our forefathers enjoyed, in the hope that they 
will give us heaven."^ 
Fired by their hatred toward the Spaniards, the mur- 
derers went to Father Rodriguez's mission at Torpiqui. En- 

5 — Barcia, Ensayo chronologico, year 1597, p. 170. 
6 — Ibid., he. cit. 



48 J. G. Johnson 

tering his house suddenly and stealthily, they told him that 
they had come to kill him. The priest attempted to dissuade 
them, but they told him not *'to weary himself preaching to 
them, but to call on God to help him."'' Whereupon Rod- 
riguez begged to be allowed to say mass, and requested that 
after his death they bury his body. He then divided the 
few things that he possessed among the poor Indians of the 
town, after which he knelt before his executioners. While in 
this posture he was slain, and his body thrown out in the open 
for the birds and beasts to eat. However, none approached 
it but a dog, "which ventured to touch it and fell dead."^ 

The Indians now sent a messenger to the chief of Guale 
Island, ordering him to kill the priests on that island, warning 
him that they were coming to see if it had been done, and 
if not, he and all his people would die with the missionaries. 
The chief, being friendly toward the Spaniards and unable 
to prevent the threatened invasion, secretly sent a supposedly 
faithful native to Assopo, where Aunon and Badajoz had their 
iTiission. He hoped that, when apprised of the danger, they 
would retire to the Spanish presidio, some distance away on 
the same island, until the danger was past. In that way he 
would not only save the Franciscans but would also clear 
himself. 

The messenger, however, through treachery or fear, did 
not deliver the message but returned to his master with a 
fictitious reply. The chief, who was well informed of the 
danger, again sent him to Assopo. This he did for three 
consecutive days, even offering the priests a boat to cross 
over to the mainland, but the warning never reached them. 
At the end of three or four days the rebels appeared, and 
such was their anger toward the Guale chief that he would 
have been killed' had he not been able to offer plausible ex- 
cuses. Wishing to be absolved from all blame he went to 
the mission, where he spoke to Father Aunon as follows: 



7 — Torquemada, Monorchia Indiana, iii, 351. 

8 — Barcja, Ensayo chronologico, year 1597, p. 170. 



1?HE Yamassee Revolt 49 

"It would have been better if you had believed me, 
and had put yourself in safety ; but you did not wish 
to take my advice, and it will not be possible to de- 
fend you from these people who have come to kill 
you."9 
The missionaries repHed that they had been ignorant of 
all that, and that he should not be troubled, as they were 
willing to die. The chief then bade them farewell, saying that 
he was going away to weep for them, and that he would return 
and bury their bodies.^^ 

Upon their arrival at Assopo, the Indians first sacked the 
mission, after which they fell upon the priests with sticks and 
macanas (wooden knives edged with flint). Father Aufion 
was held in such high esteem that, at the first blow given him, 
many of the Indians were moved to compassion and wished to 
spare him. As he knelt before the savages, a dispute arose 
am.ong them until one, stealing up behind, slew him. They 
left the bodies where they fell, but some Christian Indians 
buried them at the foot of a large cross which had been 
erected by Father Aufion. 

The murderous band now crossed over in great haste to 
Asao, on St. Simons Island, ^^ in search of Father Velascola. 
They learned in the town that the missionary was in St. Au- 
gustine, but, ascertaining the day he would return, they hid 
themselves in the reeds near the place at which he would dis- 
embark. As he was a man of immense physical strength they 
feared to attack him openly. When he landed they slyly ap- 
proached him and he fell under the blows of the macanas and 
tomahawks. ^^ 

Continuing on their way southward, the Indians stopped 
at Jekyl Island ^^ and surprised Father Davilla at his mission 
at Ospo. Hearing the clamor without, and understanding the 



9 — Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana, iii, 352. 

10 — Ibid., loc. cit. 

II — Asao was g]^ leagues from Assopo ["Examination of Alonzo de las Alas." 
1602. Ecija in his "Derrotero" says 10}^. J. D. G. Shea, Catholic Church in 
Colonial Days (New York, 1886), p. 155]. 

12 — Barcia, Ensayo chronologico, year 1597, p. 170. 

13 — The itinerary of the Indians would seem to indicate that Ospo was 
either on St Simons or Jekyl Island. Jekyl is the more probable site as Asao was 
on the southern end of St. Simons. 



50 J. G. Johnson 

danger, he refused to open the door. The invaders prepared 
to break it down, whereupon Father Davilla opened it and 
slipped past in the darkness while they sacked the building. 
They were as anxious to plunder as to kill, and occupied them- 
selves first in seizing the spoils.^^ 

While this was taking place the priest had time to con- 
ceal himself in a dense thicket near by. When the looting was 
finished, the rebels went out to look for Father Davilla, and 
upon discovering him began to shoot arrows at him. After 
having both shoulders pierced he was captured by the savages, 
who prepared to put him to death, but his life was spared 
when one of the enemy, desiring the poor clothing he wore, 
interceded for him. When they had deprived him of his 
clothing they sent him to one of their towns in the interior to 
serve as a slave. 

Elated at their success, the natives, being reinforced by 
other malcontents, provided themselves with a good supply of 
arrows and embarked in more than forty canoes, with the 
intention of investing San Pedro Island and killing the mis- 
sionaries and Spanish soldiers there. They especially desired 
to put to death the chief of that island, since he was an ally of 
the Spaniards and therefore their enemy. When they neared 
the harbor, likewise known as San Pedro, they saw a brigan- 
tine lying at anchor near the place where they would have to 
land. This boat had already remained in the harbor thirty 
days on account of contrary winds, and now its presence pre- 
vented the massacre of the inhabitants and the destruction of 
the important establishments maintained there. 

The boat contained only one soldier and a few sailors, 
but the sight of it was sufficient to throw the hostile natives 
into confusion. Perceiving this confusion, the chief of the 
island sallied forth with more boats than his opponents pos- 
sessed and attacked them. The invaders fought doggedly at 
first, but, seeing defeat before them, became panic-stricken and 
fled. Many of them leaped to the shore of the island, and 



14 — Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana, iii, 352, 



The Yamassee feEvoLt 5i 

having no means of escape were either killed or died of 
starvation in the woods. The leader escaped to the mainland 
with the survivors and fled to the north. 

When Governor Canco of Florida heard of the insurrec- 
tion, he led overland a force of infantry to the Peninsula of 
Guale, while a number of ships proceeded to the same destina- 
tion.^^ The Indians, however, hid themselves in the swamps, 
and the governor was able to capture but one live Indian, an 
interpreter, from whom he secured no information other than 
that the missionaries had been killed. In retaliation the 
soldiers burned the corn in the fields, in consequence of which 
famine completed the punishment which the Spaniards found 
themselves lunable to inflict.^*^' The destruction of the crops 
reacted on the Spanish settlements, as supplies failed to arrive 
from Spain, and the officials now had no source from which 
to replenish their own failing stores.^'^ 

Wishing to ascertain if any of the missionaries still lived, 
Governor Canco continued his exertions. He sent a vessel to 
the Spanish settlement in Santa Elena (Port Royal Sound) in 
the spring of 1598 to enlist the support of the friendly natives 
of that region. Since they lived only a short distance from 
the Peninsula of Guale it was thought that they could harry 
the territory of the revolted Indians. Lieutenant Ecija, the 
commander of the vessel, bestowed gifts on the cacique of the 
Santa Elena tribe and promised to return in sixty days to 
learn the results of the proposed invasion.^^ 

At the end of the specified time Lieutenant Ecija returned 
to Santa Elena and found that the cacique had waged war on 
the Guale Indians during his absence. He was informed that 
Father Davilla was a prisoner near the village of Solofina on 
the Peninsula of Guale. Ecija now coasted along the shore 
of Guale, hoping to pick up someone with further information 



15 — Official Report of Governor Canco in Brooks, Unwritten History of 
old St. Augustine, p. 35. Presumably Ossabaw Island was known to the Spaniards 
as the Peninsula of Guale. 

16 — Barcia, Ensayo chronologico, year 1597, p. 172. 

// — Torquemada, MonarcJiia Indiana, iii, 354. 

iS — Report of Governor Canco in Brooks, Unwritten History of old St. 
Augustine, p. 36. 



52 J. G. Johnson 

concerning the captive. Stopping at Tolomato, he seized a 
native, who said the priest was still alive, and agreed after 
much coaxing to take a letter to him. 

When the messenger returned, he brought with him sev- 
eral caciques, who promised to give up the missionary in return 
for certain Indian boys, sons of some of the chiefs, who were at 
that time held as hostages in St. Augustine. Ecija promised 
to return with the boys, as well as a quantity of hatchets and 
spades demanded by the Indians, within thirty days. Return- 
ing in fifteen days to Tolomato, he heaped gifts upon the 
chiefs, but they had undergone a change of mind and refused 
to give up the prisoner. Whereupon the lieutenant became 
angry, threatened to send for three hundred soldiers, and fol- 
low them to Tama.^^ Awed by these threats, the savages sur- 
rendered Father Davilla.^^ 

Ecija now returned to St. Augustine, taking with him 
Father Davilla and seven Indians whom he had captured and 
whom he suspected of complicity in the murder of the Fran- 
ciscans.^^ It now became known that the captive priest had 
been forced to carry water and wood and guard the fields of 
his captor s.^^ They turned him over to the boys to shoot at 
with arrows and, tiring of his patience, finally decided to burn 
him at the stake. When he had been tied and the fire built before 
him, they offered to spare him if he would renounce his re- 
ligion and acknowledge the gods of the Indians. This offer 
he refused, and rebuked them for their presumption.^^ 

The Indians marvelled at the courage of their prisoner. 
One of the principal native women, whose son was a prisoner 
at St. Augustine, was moved to speak in his behalf, hoping to 
save the priest and exchange him for her son. On account 
of the prominence of this woman her request was granted. His 



J9 — The region bordering on the Altamaha River. 

20 — Report of Governor Canco in Brooks, Unwritten History of old 
St. Augustine, p. 37. 

21 — Ibid., p. 38. 

22 — Barcia, Ensayo chronologico, year 1598, p. 172, 

23 — Torquemada, Monarchia Indiana, iii, 354. 



The Yamassee Revolt S3 

captors now attempted to make restitution to the Franciscan 
by offering an Indian girl as a wife, but this offer was also 
spurned.^^ 

When the rescue party reached St. Augustine the governor 
requested the custodian of the Convent of St. Francis, Father 
Marron, to permit Father Davilla to testify in the pending 
investigation. The custodian gave his consent, but Father 
Davilla refused to do so, saying that it was prohibited him by 
the canons of the priesthood! He maintained that the testimony 
of the seven captive Indians brought to the capital by Ecija 
would be sufficient to establish upon whom the responsibility 
for the crimes should rest.^-^ 

One of the prisoners was now brought before the governor, 
and, upon being questioned through an interpreter, replied 
that his name was Lucas ; that he came from Torpiqui, and that 
his father was cacique there ; that he was a Christian ; that he 
had been present when Father Rodriguez was killed ; that the 
father was killed because he forbade witchcraft and a plurality 
of wives; that he was not present when the other missionaries 
were killed.^^ 

Upon questioning the other prisoners, it became evident 
in the minds of the officials that Lucas was one of the leaders 
in the revolt. He was therefore condemned to death for hav- 
ing been present and having participated in the death of 
Father Rodriguez. Proceedings against the other six Indians 
were postponed, as they were all boys under age.^'' Thus ended 
an affair that threatened for a time the very existence of the 
Spanish settlements throughout the provinces of Florida. 



24 — Ibid., p. 353. 

25 — Report of Governor Canco in Brooks, Unwritten History of old St. 
Augustine, p. 40. 

^d—Report of Governor Canco in Brooks, Umvritten History of old St. 
Augustine, pp. 40-42. 

27 — Ihid., p. 47. 



A GREAT AMBASSADOR 
By R. p. Brooks, Ph.D. 

UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA 

The Life and Letters of Walter H. Page ^ is a work of 
intense; interest. Reading it, the convinced beHever in the 
capacity of our country to produce men the equal in every 
respect of the Old World's best, may well have his emotions 
profoundly stirred. Few public men have ever played more 
acceptably so difficult a part as did Page in the Great War. 
The lover of pure literature will find the volumes a constant 
delight — we have no finer letters ; and for the student and 
historian of the War a new source of first-hand material of 
priceless value has been made available. 

A comparatively small portion of the work (about one 
third of Volume I) is given to the 'Tife." In brief compass 
the author has told the story of Page's many-sided activities 
before his appointment in 1913 as Ambassador to the Court 
of St. James's. Born in North Carolina in 1855, Page's first 
memories were associated with the American Civil War and 
the Reconstruction period. How vivid were those early 
impressions readers of The Southerner will recall. In pass- 
ing, it is interesting to know that Page's father was an old 
line Whig, not over-fond of slavery and an anti-secessionist. 
He believed that the war was ''the most foolhardy enterprise 
that man ever undertook," a judgment which the son later 
reproduced in his novel. Poverty was the common lot of 
most Southerners in the Reconstruction period, but Page's 
father seems to have prospered more than the average man 
of the section and was able to send his son to the renowned 
Bingham School. There he laid the foundation of his culture 
by thorough training in Latin, Greek and Mathematics. On 
completing his preparation he would naturally have proceeded 
to the University of North Carolina, but, that institution 



I — Burton J. Hendrick, Life and Letters of Walter H. Page, 2 vols. 
Garden City, N. Y., Doubleday, Page & Co., 1922. 



A Great Ambassador 55 

having been practically destroyed by the Reconstructionists, 
Page matriculated in Trinity College. This institution he 
detested on account of its low standards, and shifted to 
Randolph-Macon in Virginia. Thence he migrated to the 
new Johns Hopkins University, as one of the first twenty 
Fellows of that great institution. At the Hopkins Page came 
under the moulding hand of Gildersleeve, and carried 
through life the indelible impress of that master teacher. 

We cannot attempt to trace in detail the career of the 
future ambassador after leaving the Hopkins in 1878. The 
sort of training he had received would naturally have thrown 
him into college teaching, and it is likely that he would have 
taken a professorial post had one been available. He was 
considered for the chair of Greek at the University of 
North Carolina, but his religious unorthodoxy stood in the 
way. Page's real bent, however, was journalism. Begin- 
ning with newspaper work in Louisville, Ky., he had repor- 
torial or editorial connection with various papers in St. 
Joseph, Mo., Atlanta, Washington and Raleigh. At Raleigh 
he founded the State Chronicle, in the editorial columns of 
which he stirred North Carolina to her foundations with his 
advocacy of the new spirit of progress. Travel over most 
of the United States and in Europe had opened his eyes to 
the true state of education in the South and her backwardness 
in other respects, and he fearlessly preached his views to an 
unwilling constituency. The State Chronicle failed in 1885 
and Page went to the North, where his career henceforth 
lay. His subsequent brilliant journalistic achievements are 
a familiar story. He resuscitated the Forum, making it one 
of the most trenchant and live reviews in the land ; he suc- 
ceeded to the editorship of the Atlantic Monthly in 1898, 
thus reaghing the pinnacle of American journalism; in 1899 
he and his friend, Frank Doubleday, formed the publishing 
firm of Doubleday, Page and Company, and now, as part 
proprietor. Page became the editor of the World's Work, a 
periodical designed to fill for the masses the place the Forum 



56 R. P. Brooke 

and the Atlantic Monthly occupied for the select few. The 
shift from the Atlantic Monthly to the World's Work was 
highly significant. 

"Scholar though Page was, and lover of the finest things 
in literature that he had always been, yet this sympathy and 
interest had always lain with the masses. Perhaps it is im- 
possible to make literature democratic, but Page believed that he 
would be genuinely serving the great cause that was nearest his 
heart if he could spread wide the facts of the modern world, 
especially the facts of America, and if he could clothe the ex- 
pression in language which, while always dignified and even 
'literary,' would still be sufficiently touched with the vital, the pic- 
turesque, and the 'human' to make his new publication appeal 
to a wide audience of intelligent, everyday Americans. It was 
thus part of his general programme of improving the status of 
the average man, and it formed a logical part of his philoso- 
phy of human advancement. For the only acceptable measure 
of any civilization, Page believed, was the extent to which it 
improved the condition of the common citizen. A few cul- 
tured and university-trained men at the top; a few ancient 
families living in luxury; a few painters and poets and states- 
men and generals ; these things, in Page's view, did not constitute 
a satisfactory state of society; the real test was the extent 
to which the masses participated in education, in the necessities 
and comforts of existence, in the right of self-evolution and 
self-expression, in that 'equality of opportunity,' which. Page 
never wearied of repeating, was 'the basis of social progress*' 
The mere right to vote and to hold office was not democracy; 
parliamentary majorities and political caucuses were not de- 
mocracy — at the iDcst these things were only details and not 
the most important ones ; democracy was the right of every 
man to enjoy, in accordance with his aptitudes of character 
and mentality, the material and spiritual opportunities that 
nature and science had placed at the disposition of mankind. 
This democratic creed had now become the dominating interest 
of Page's life. From this time on it consumed all his activities." 
(Vol. I, pp. 70-71.) 

We must regretfully pass over the years, full of activity 
and toil for social betterment, particularly in the interest of 
his native state, and hurry on to the ''Wilsonian era." Wil- 
son and Page had met and laid the basis of an enduring 
friendship when the former was a young lawyer in Atlanta 
at the time that Page was there as the representative of the 
Nczv York World. For thirty years following, the two kept 
in constant touch with each other. Page had seen his old 
friend abandon the law for a professorship in Bryn Mawr, 
remove to Princeton as professor and later president, become 



A Great Ambassador 57 

governor of New Jersey and finally accept the Democratic 
nomination for the Presidency of the United States; indeed 
Page was one of the powers behind the scenes who put 
Wilson into the presidential campaign of 1912. He it was 
who brought House and Wilson together; he was one of 
Wilson's closest advisers in the early days following his 
election; it was on Page's suggestion that Wilson broke the 
century-honored custom and delivered his messages to Con- 
gress in person. Both being men of the highest type of 
culture, with the same outlook and hopes for the future of 
American democracy, it was but natural that Wilson should 
have chosen Page for a cabinet position; and indeed Page 
was slated for one, but circumstances which it is unnecessary 
to relate here caused the President to offer him the most 
important of the ambassadorial posts instead. 

The ''Letters" begin with Page's arrival in England. 
Like all his predecessors, the new ambassador found himself 
embarrassed and humiliated by the disgraceful parsimony 
that has always characterized America in providing for her 
representatives abroad. He had no official residence, but was 
forced to put up in an inferior hotel. The American Em- 
bassy was even worse. * 

"I had never in my life been in an American Embassy. I 
had had no business with them in Paris or in London on my pre- 
vious visits. In fact I had never been in any embassy except the 
British Embassy at Washington. But the moment I entered 
that dark and dingy hall at 123, Victoria Street, betv^^een two 
cheap stores—the same entrance that the dwellers in the cheap 
flats above used — I knew that Uncle Sam had no fit dwelling 
there. And the Ambassador's room greatly depressed me — dingy 
with twenty-nine years of dirt and darkness, and utterly undig- 
nified. And the rooms for the secretaries and attaches were the 
little bed-rooms, kitchen, etc., of that cheap flat; that's all it was. 
For the place we paid $1,500 a year. I did not understand then 
and I do not understand yet how Lowell, Bayard, Phelps, Hay, 
Choate, and Reid endured that cheap hole. Of course they 
stayed there only about an hour a day; but they sometimes saw 
important people there. And, whether they ever saw anybody 
there or not, the offtces of the United States Government in 
London ought at least to be as good as a common lawyer's 
office in a country town in a rural state of our Union. Nobody 
asked for anything for an embassy; nobody got anything for 
an embassy. I made up my mind in ten minutes that I'd get 
out of this place." (Vol. I, pp. 133-134.) 



58 R. P. Brooks 

Piage was an instant success. He fell in love with 
the English country, English life, English customs, and the 
people, though he was forever making good-natured thrusts 
at the British lack of progressiveness and laughing at the 
old-fashioned ways of the mother country. Enduring 
friendships were made with the best of Englishmen, such as 
Grey, Morley, Bryce, Balfour, and scores of others. The 
letters of these early years are inimitable, full of piquant 
charm and original observations on English character, social 
life and politics. Though never for a moment losing his 
faith in America and her ideals, he came to hold in very 
high esteem the English men and women with whom he came 
into daily contact, and to appreciate the fundamental de- 
mocracy of English institutions. 

The routine and generally agreeable course of ambas- 
sadorial life was rudely disrupted when the Great War 
suddenly, in the summer of 1914, broke on an astonished 
world. There is nothing more dramatic in the "Life and 
Letters" than the account of the interview between Sir Ed- 
ward Grey and Page when the Foreign Secretary announced 
that Germany had been informed of England's intention to 
declare war, if the neutrality of Belgium were violated. The 
interview cannot 'here be described. Its great importance 
lies in the fact that Sir Edward made it perfectly clear that 
England went into the war to uphold the sacredness of an 
international obligation and for no commercial or land- 
grabbing motives. (Vol. I, pp 312-317.) England certainly 
would not have declared war at that time but for the viola- 
tion of Belgian neutrality. 

Chapter I (''England Under the Stress of War") is 
a classic in the literature of the Great War. Page's letters 
of that period convey a more vivid picture of the conduct 
of Engl/and in those dread days of the fall of 1914 than can 
elsewhere be found. From the first. Page, though observing 
strict neutrality and though representing Germany and 
Austria, having taken over their embassies, was wholly 
sympathetic to the allied cause. To him, the war was a war 



A Great Ambassador 59 

to protect civilization from conquest at the hands of a ruth- 
less military autocracy. Of the ultimate result he was never 
in doubt. In one of his letters of the time he siays : 

"The Germans have far more than their match in resources 
and in shrewdness and — in character. As the bloody drama un- 
folds itself, the hollow pretence and essential barbarity of Prus- 
sian militarism become plainer and plainer : there is no doubt 
of that. And so does the invincibility of this [the English] 
race." (VoU I, p. 332.) 

Seeing the trend of events from the inside, and having 
access to numerous sources of information concealed from 
the public, he was convinced that the conquest of America 
was the ultimate prize to which Germany looked. 

To the informed American student of the World War, 
there is no more painful period in our history than the years 
which elapsed before the United States declared war on 
Germany in 191 7. From the outset President Wilson seemed 
incapable of grasping the real meaning of the war. He seemed 
almost to have thought both sides equally culpable in so far 
as the origin of the war was concerned, and that the com- 
batants were actuated by equally selfish motives. He was 
not inclined to yield in the slightest any of our legal rights 
in order to ladvance the cause of the allies. He insisted on 
the utmost degree of neutrality, both in thought and in 
action, to the dismay of our ambassadors. As Page said, 

"The President started out with the idea that it was a war 
brought on by many obscure causes — economic and the like; and 
he thus missed its whole meaning. We have ever since 
been dealing with the chips which fly from the war machine 
and have missed the larger meaning of the conflict. Thus we 
have failed to render help to the side of LiberaHsm and Democ- 
racy, which are at stake in the world." (Vol. I, p. 301.) 

Our government bedame involved in interminable discus- 
sions over the seizure by English cruisers of cargoes of 
cotton and other war materials destined for Germany. 
Bryan, with the President's approval, insisted that England 
adopt the Declaration of London, which had been repudiated 
by her and all the other powers except the United States, in 
time of peace, and the adoption of which would have made 
it impossible for England to use her fleet to prevent Ger- 



6o R. P. Brooks 

many from getting war supplies from the outside world. We 
came near a break with England on the subject of contra- 
band, and only the good sense and perfect understanding of 
Grey and Page prevented a rupture. 

However distressing to Page and other ardent advo- 
cates of American participation in the war may have been 
the attitude of our government during the early phases of 
the struggle, the sense of our failure to play a man's part was 
incalculably increased by the conduct of the Wilson admin- 
istration after the Lusitania horror. Page, House, and in- 
deed practically all Americans residing in London, and leading 
Englishmen, thought a declaration of war would follow im- 
mediately. Instead we had notes and the "too proud to 
fight" utterance. This speech Page regarded as a tragedy. 
(Vol. n, p. 19.) The "strict accountability" to which Wilson 
proposed to hold Germany amounted to nothing. Followed 
the sinking of the Arabic, the Hesperian, the Falaba, the 
Gulflight, and nothing but notes resulted. Page was unspar- 
ing and unmerciful in the frankness of his letters to Wilson, 
telling him exactly what was being said by Americans in 
England of his attitude. At this period of his ambassadorial 
career Page iand Wilson became estranged; Page lost re- 
spect for Wilson and Wilson grew to dislike and mistrust 
Page. "The friendship and association of forty years were 
as though they had never been," as Hendrick puts it. The truth 
is that Wilson could not brook opposition of any sort. One 
gets the impression that he shut himself off from those con- 
tacts which would have kept him in touch with the world of 
realities, took no counsel or advice of any one, and the mo- 
ment any of his friends, however close, differed with him, 
that friend was dropped — Harvey, Page, House, Lansing are 
cases in point. He took to referring to Page as "more 
British than the British," and said he had to discount 
everything Page wrote. 

Indifference to and contempt for the government of the 
United States speedily resulted from our supineness in the 



I 



A Great Ambassador 6i 

face of continued insult from the Germans. Page wrote 
Wilson in September, 191 5: 

"I have authoritatively heard of a private conversation be- 
tween a leading member of the Cabinet and a group of important 
officials all friendly to us in which all sorrowfully expressen 
the opinion that the United States will submit to any indignity 
and that no effect is now to be hoped for from its protests 
against unlawful submarine attacks or against anything else. 
The inactivity of our Government, or its delay, which they assume 
is the same as inactivity, is attributed to domestic politics or to 
the lack of national consciousness or unity. 

"No explanation has appeared in the British press of our 
Government's inactivity or of any regret or promise of repa- 
ration by Germany for the sinking of the Lusitania, the Falaha, 
the Gulflight, the Nehraskan, the Arabic, or the Hesperian, nor 
any explanation of a week's silence about the Dumba letter; 
and the conclusion is drawn that, in the absence of action by us, 
all these acts have been practically condoned. 

"I venture to suggest that such explanations be made public 
as will remove, if possible, the practically unanimous conclusion 
here that our Government will permit these and similar future 
acts to be explained away. I am surprised almost every hour by 
some new evidence of the loss of respect for our Government, 
which, since the sinking of the Arabic, has become so great as to 
warrant calling it a complete revulsion of English feeling to- 
ward the United States. There is no general wish for us to 
enter the war, but there is genuine sorrow that we are thought 
to submit to any indignity, especially after having taken a firm 
stand. I conceive I should be lacking in duty if I did not report 
this rapid and unfortunate change in public feeling, which seems 
likely to become permanent unless facts are quickly made public 
which may change it." (Vol. II, pp. 43-44.) 

Page ceased attending social functions, so embarrassing 
was his position and so great his humiliation. After the 
sinking of the Sussex in April, 19 16, Wilson sent what was 
practically an ultimatum to Germany; Germany promised to 
desist from further sinkings. From that time to our declar- 
ation of war in the following year, Wilson devoted his ener- 
gies to bringing the combatants together and effecting peace. 
He was obsessed with the idea of going down in history as 
the great peace-maker. A few weeks after the sinking of 
the Sussex he made that speech in which he used the expres- 
sion that the United States *'was not concerned with the 
causes and objects of the war." In the same speech he 
referred to the "freedom of the seas" as one of the foundation 



62 R. P. Brooks 

rocks of an enduring peace. No man ever coined more 
harmful and unfortunate phrases. We all know how the 
palace move came to naught. 

In August, 19 1 6, Page was summoned home for a con- 
ference with the President. He came armed with every sort 
of document and with a carefully prepared statement of 
European conditions. His memorandum of this visit (Vol. 
H, p. 171, seq.) is an amazing revelation. He was kept 
on tenterhooks for two weeks without being given an oppor- 
tunity to discuss matters with Wilson. Two luncheons were 
given him by the President at which not a word about 
foreign affairs was spoken, at which no one was present 
except the members of the President's family. (Ambassador 
Sharp was present at the second luncheon.) Page says 
there was "no social sense at the White House." Wilson saw 
almost nobody except members of Congress, whom he sum- 
moned for special conferences — no social touch; his contact 
with members of his cabinet was purely formal. The result 
was that the President did not learn the truth about men or 
affairs. He gave nobody a chance to tell him. The President 
played a lone hand, taking the entire responsibility for the 
conduct of the government in the great emergencies which 
were constantly arising. 

"That wasn't leadership in a democracy," Page goes on to 
say. "Right here is the President's vast failure. From it there 
is now no escape imless the Germans commit more submarine 
crimes. They have kept the United States for their own ex- 
ploiting after the war. They have thus had a real triumph of 
us." (Vol. II, p. 175.) 

Page found few men in Washington who showed any 
clear conception of the situation. Lansing (Secretary of 
State since Bryan had happily retired) showed not the 
slightest interest in our relations with England. 

"There is a great lesson in this lamentable failure of the 
President really to lead the Nation. The United States stands 
for democracy and free opinion as it stands for nothing else 
and as no other nation stands for it. Now when democracy 
and free opinion are at stake as they have not before been, we 
take a 'neutral' stand — we throw away our very birthright. We 
may talk of 'humanity' all we like: we have missed the largest 



A Great Ambassador 6^ 

chance that ever came to help the large cause that brought us 
into being as a nation." (Vol. II, p. 178.) 

Profoundly discouraged and unhappy and with failing 
health, Page resigned his office after Wilson's re-election. 
He had done his utmost to make the President see the hght, 
and considered that he had failed. His letter of resignation, 
November 24, 1916, (Vol. H, pp. 190-195) is one of the 
best of the many communications he sent to President Wil- 
son. It is a noteworthy fact, commented on by all who have 
studied the "Letters," that practically all the leading points in 
Wilson's address of April 2, 1917, in which he asked Con- 
gress to declare war on Germany, are to be found in Page's 
letter of resignation. 

Page was induced to hold on, however, and things con- 
tinued in about the same shape for some months. During 
the interval Wilson added the straw which broke the camel's 
back with his "peace without victory" speech. In February, 
1917, Germany renewed her unrestricted submarine warfare, 
a policy which was shortly followed by war. 

Of the subsequent history of the time, in so far as it con- 
cerns Page, little can be said here. Our declaration of war, 
and Wilson's vigorous prosecution of affairs and his really 
noble utterances, went far to restore him to popularity in 
England and on the continent. Page finally resigned in 
August, 1918, and returned, a broken man, to die in December 
of that year. It is pleasant to realize that his last days were 
happy. The United States and England had at last joined 
hands in the great enterprise of making "the world safe for 
democracy." 

A careful reading of the two volumes should dispose of 
a belief that has taken deep root in the minds of the 
American people. This idea is that all along Wilson was 
sympathetic to the allied cause, but was restrained from en- 
tering into the struggle by reason of the spiritual unprepared- 
ness of the American people; that he patiently waited until 
we should have been educated up to the true issues at stake, 



64 R/P. Brooks 

and that finally, when Germany had exhausted our national 
patience, he seized the psychological moment and did what 
he had all along wanted to do. No ground for this tradition 
can be found in the "Letters." Wilson did not lead the 
American people into the war: the American people forced 
him into it. He went in most unwillingly. As Page says 
(a final judgment of Wilson's character) : 

"He seems no longer to regard himself nor to speak as a 
leader — only as the mouthpiece of public opinion after opinion 
has run over him. 

"He has not breathed a spirit into the people: he has en- 
couraged them to supineness. He is not a leader, but rather a 
stubborn phrasemaker." (Vol. II, p. 223.) 

No reviewer can do justice to the Life and Letters of 
Walter H. Page. Though the present reviewer has taken 
ample space, he realizes the necessary limitations of all re- 
viewers, and his own in particular. One must read the 
volumes to have an adequate conception of the great am- 
bassador's service to the nation and to the world. Time will 
make this clear, and it may be confidently predicted that, 
with the passing years, Page will loom large in the annals 
of the United States. 

A qualifying word should be added. It will naturally 
occur to the thoughtful reader of "The Life and Letters," or of 
this review, that they give only a one-sided view of the contro- 
versies of the period. The reviewer has given the point of 
view of Page and those who saw with him. What was in 
Wilson's mind at this time? What were the American condi- 
tions that may have forced him into attitudes and utterances 
unpalatable to Englishmen and to those Americans who were 
ardent advocates of war? These problems must await the 
publication of Wilson's papers and correspondence or his 
memoirs. Certainly it would be unfair to venture a final 
judgment of the men or events of the w^ar period until the 
whole truth shall be known. 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 
EIGHTY-FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING 

Savannah, Ga., February 12, 1923. 

The Eighty-fourth Annual Meeting of the Georgia 
Historical Society was held at Hodgson Hall at 11 o'clock 
this morning, with Mr. William W. Gordon, the President, 
presiding and Charles F. Groves, the Secretary, acting as 
secretary. 

The minutes of the Eighty-third Annual Meeting of 
April 12, 1922, were read and confirmed. 

The President read his Annual Report. (See page 69.) 
The report of the Secretary-Treasurer was read and ordered 
filed. It covers the financial operations since the date of the 
last Annual Meeting, land also carries information as to the 
number of different classes of members, with comparison of 
the number of members on the rolls last year. Announcement 
was made that the financial reports had been checked for the 
Finance Committee by Mr. T. M. Cunningham, Jr. 

Mr. William Harden, the Librarian, read his report. 
(See page 72.) 

The President announced the appointment of Colonel C. H. 
Olmstead, Colonel Alexander R. Lawton, Mrs. Peter W. Mel- 
drim and Mr. Sigo Myers, as a committee to nominate five 
curators to succeed those whose terms expired today, /after 
which the meeting recessed. During the recess the commit- 
tee convened, and upon receiving information that the 
committee was ready to report, the President called the 
meeting to order, and Colonel Olmstead, for the committee, re- 
ported the following nominations for curators to serve for 
three years: 

Dr. R. P. Brooks; Mrs. Elizabeth M. Bullard; Prof. 
Percy Scott Flippin ; Mr. William W. Gordon ; Judge Alex- 
ander C. King. 



66 Georgia Historical Society 

There were no other nominations, and by lunanimous 
vote of the meeting the rules were suspended and the Secre- 
tary was authorized to cast the ballot for the election of 
Dr. Brooks, Mrs. Bullard, Prof. Flippin, Mr. Gordon, and 
Judge King, as per the report of the nominating commit- 
tee. This was done, and the President declared that the 
persons named on the ticket as herein recorded had been 
duly elected curators of the .Society to serve until 1926 or 
until election and qualification of their successors. 

The Secretary read a memorial on the death of our late 
President, Judge Beverly D. Evans, which memorial was 
prepared by Judge Andrew J. Cobb. (See page ']'].) 

The President's report having contained a reference to 
the fact that the active management and editorship of the 
Quarterly had been transferred from Macon to Savannah, 
because of the desire of those heretofore carrying this 
responsibility to be relieved from the labors necessarily 
incident thereto, the following resolutions were offered, 
seconded, and unanimously adopted : 

"RESOLVED, That the sincere thanks of the Georgia 
Historical Society be extended to Prof. Percy Scott 
Flippin for the valuable services he has rendered the 
Society during the past two years las Managing Editor 
of the Georgia Historical Quarterly, and that the So- 
ciety expresses to him also its appreciation of his will- 
ingness to continue to serve as a member of the editorial 
board. 

RESOLVED Further, that the thanks of the Georgia 
Historical Society be extended to Dr. R. P. Brooks and 
to Dr. E. M. Coulter for the valuable services rendered 
by them to the Society through their work on the edi- 
torial board of the Georgia Historical Quarterly. 

The meeting expressed thanks to Mrs. Elizabeth M. 
Bullard for having, at her own expense, lan expert to restore 
the painting of Lady Huntingdon which has long been the 



£iGHtY- Fourth Annual Meeting ^^ 

property of the Society. In this connection there was a dis- 
cussion by Messrs. Leonard L. Mackall, Otis Ashmore, and 
William Harden, in which it was brought out that this 
painting is undoubtedly the original one owned by the Union 
Society and presented many years ago by the Union Society 
to the Chatham Academy, which in turn presented it to the 
Georgia Historical Society. It was suggested that the picture 
which was reproduced in the Bethesda booklet a year or so 
ago was not the original portrait of Lady Huntingdon, as 
was at one time supposed. 

A number of interesting papers and photographs were 
presented to the Society by Mr. Leonard L. Mackall, and 
Mr. Mackall expressed his intention of writing articles on 
some of this material for the Quarterly. Among the gifts 
were photographs of two drawings in the Crown collection 
of the British Museum, representing Tybee Light and Cock- 
spur Fort at the entrance of the Savannah River in 1764. 
Duplicates are in the DeRenne Library, which were repro- 
duced in the Georgia Historical Society Collections, vol. 8, 
1913. Their origin was not known then but has since been 
discovered. Mr. Mackall also presented a photograph of the 
music and words of ''My Life is Like the Summer Rose," 
music by Charles Thibault, poem by R. H. Wilde, published 
in New York in 1822-26. It was explained that the Georgia 
Historical Society published in 1871 an interesting little book 
by Anthony Bartlett on the complicated history of this poem 
and the strange charge of plagiarism brought against the 
author of the poem as the result of a joke. A vote of thanks 
was tendered to Mr. Mackall for his generous gifts, and he 
was requested by the meeting to suitably mark the photo- 
graphs, pamphlets, and documents, so that visitors to the 
Library might more readily appreciate these interesting 
articles. 

The following were elected members of the Society: 
Mr. J. N. Oemler; Mr. Herman Vaisberg; Mr. George T. 
Pate; Mrs. J. N. Oemler; Mr. J. W. Griffeth ; Mr. H. W. 



68 Georgia Historical Society 

Witcover; Mrs. H. C. Foss; Mrs. Louise P. Hogan; Mrs. 
C. G. Anderson, Jr. ; Miss Rhoda Worth. 

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned 
subject to the call of the President. 

Chas. F. Groves, 

Secretary. 

Immediately following adjournment of the Eighty-fourth 
Annual Meeting of the Georgia Historical Society this day 
the Board of Curators convened. 

Present: Mr. Otis Ashmore; Mrs. Elizabeth M. Bul- 
lard ; Mr. T. M. Cunningham, Jr. ; Mr. William W. Gordon ; 
Mrs. Alexander R. Lawton; Mrs. Gordon Saussy; Mr. Or- 
ville A. Park; Mr. C. Seymour Thompson; Mr. Charles F. 
Groves, who acted as secretary. 

Absent: Judge Andrew J. Cobb; Dr. R. P. Brooks; 
Mr. Henry R. Goetchius; Mr. Lawton B. Evans; Judge 
Alexander C. King; Dr. P. S. Flippin; Mr. A. C. Newell. 

The following officers were unanimously elected to 
serve for the ensuing year, or until election and qualification 
of their successors : 

President: William W. Gordon. Vice Presidents: R. P. 
Brooks ; Otis Ashmore ; Alexander C. King ; Lawton B. Evans. 
Secretary-Treasurer: Charles F. Groves. Corresponding 
Secretary: William Harden. Librarian: William Harden. 

Mr. C. Seymour Thompson, recently appointed Chair- 
man of the Board of Editors, read a report. (See page 73.) 
Mr. Thompson was authorized to make an examination of 
the library's books, as proposed in his report, and to discard 
such of the books as in the judgment of himself and Mr. 
Harden are no longer worth keeping. Mr. Thompson's rec- 
ommendation that out-of-town members of the Society be 
privileged to secure books from the library by mail was 
favorably acted upon. 

The President stated that he would in due time announce 
the personnel of the various standing committees. 

ADJOURNED. Chas. F. Groves, 

Secretary. 



Eighty-Fourth Annual Meeting 69 

REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT 

To the Officers and Members of the Georgia Historical 
Society : 

I have the honor to submit the President's annual re- 
port. With the election of Judge Evans, v^hose interest in 
historical matters and whose zeal for the w^elfare of the 
Society were most marked, we looked forward to a successful 
year. The sudden and untimely death of the President dis- 
organized the Society, and the affairs were taken over by 
Vice President Minis, who was compelled to be absent from 
the city during the summer and who, upon his return to the 
city, met with an accident which incapacitated him for further 
duty. On December 8, 1922, I was elected President to fill 
the unexpired term of Judge Evans. Financial matters have 
been the chief problems, owing to the considerable expense 
of printing the magazine, but the situation was improved by 
permitting the Georgia Society of Colonial Dames of 
America to have the exclusive use of the basement rooms on 
the eastern side of the building, under an arrangement which 
has resulted in the beautifying of the rooms, together with a 
cash payment of $150.00. 

It has been apparent for several years that our building 
and our library have fallen practically into disuse, and I have 
felt that such a beautiful building and such a valuable col- 
lection of books should be more accessible to the public. 
Although some books might be injured or even lost if the 
library were thrown open to the public, I have felt that if 
even one person read one or more of these books and derived 
some information thereby, the individual as well as the com- 
munity would be benefited and the sacrifice of one or more 
books would be well worth while. I therefore set to work 
to make it possible for our library to be open to the public, 
and through the co-operation of Mr. C. S. Thompson, 
Superintendent of the Savannah Public Library, we have 
been able to arrange for our library to be a branch of the 



70 Georgia Historical Society 

Public Library and we have secured an appropriation of 
$2,000.00 per annum from the city for its support. Our 
Hbrary is located in a thickly settled district and is easily 
accessible; hence, we believe the new move will prove valu- 
able to the Savannah public and to the Public Library itself, 
and likewise to our own Society in relieving it of some of the 
overhead expense, so that these two accessions, the Society 
of Colonial Dames and the branch library, should prove of 
value financially and otherwise to our organization. 

Our magazine costs about $1,000.00 a year and for 
some time has been published at Macon, Ga., with Professor 
P. S. Flippin as Managing Editor, assisted by a Board of 
Editors headed by Dr. R. P. Brooks. It has been found 
advisable to move the headquarters of the magazine to Sa- 
vannah, and Mr. C. S. Thompson has been elected Managing 
Editor and his duties will commence with the March issue. 
Professor FHppin and Dr. Brooks have given a great deal 
of time to the magazine and are entitled to enormous credit 
in keeping it going with very little outside assistance and 
under serious disadvantages, and they are due the thanks of 
the Society for their splendid efforts. Under the manage- 
ment of Mr. Thompson, I am sure the magazine will keep 
up to its former standard and will continue to form an 
admirable link between the Society at Savannah and the 
large membership throughout the State. 

The financial outlook for the coming year indicates that 
our income may fall short of our expenses about $700.00, 
which situation can best be reached by securing new mem- 
bers. The members will note that an application form has 
been sent to them, and it is hoped that each member will get at 
least one or more additional members of the Society, and 
this alone will be sufificient to meet this casual deficiency. 

The President desires to express his thanks to Mr. C. F. 
Groves, secretary-treasurer, for his very intelligent co- 



Eighty-Fourth Annual Meeting 71 

operation throughout the year and especially while the 
Society was languishing for lack of an executive head. 

The President also desires to thank Mr. William Harden 
for his constant attention to his duties as Librarian. 

The new departure of putting ladies on the Board of 
Curators has proved a wise one and the President has re- 
ceived the instant and cordial co-operation of these ladies 
whenever they have been called upon for any service. 

In conclusion, the President is pleased to note that the 
Society has taken on new life, the building presents a lively 
and lactive appearance, and the public can now look forward 
to some pleasure in using our facilities and the members of 
our Society can feel assured of a new and prosperous 
regime. 

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY-TREASURER 

The following is la summary of the membership at 
February i, 1923, and April i, 1922: 

1923 1922 



Members ($3) . .... 
Contributing Members ($10) 
Sustaining Members ($25) . 



Life Members ($100) 
Honorary Members 
Corresponding Members 



491 


528 


32 


Z7 


I 


I 


524 


566 


5 


5 


3 


5 


5 


5 



537 581 

The Society had on February i of this year, liquid as- 
sets amounting to $3,135.81, compared with $3,227.07 on 
April I, last year, April i being the date on which the accounts 
were closed prior to the annual meeting in 1922. 



f2 Georgia Historical SociEtY 

On April i, 1922, there was a balance of $173.90 in an 
account known as the Publishing Fund. Subsequent to that 
date $326.41 was collected through the efforts of Dr. R. P. 
Brooks as a special fund for publishing the Quarterly. The 
sum of these two has been expended for that purpose. The 
Publishing Fund having been extinguished, the accounts are 
now classified as a General Fund and a Permanent Fund. 

The General Fund on February i, 1923, had a cash credit 
balance of $1,078.34, against cash of $821.90 and Liberty 
Bonds of $500 on April i, 1922. 

There are no unpaid bills against the Society. 

The Permanent Fund had on February i, 1923, a cash 
balance of $557.47 compared with $405.17 last year, and also, 
this Fund has now and has had for several years Third 
Liberty Bonds of the par value of $1,500. 

The other property value of the Society, besides the 
contents of the Library building, consists of Hodgson Hall. 
Insurance is carried on the building at $27,000, and on the 
contents at $15,000. 

REPORT OF THE LIBRARIAN 

The report of the librarian, Mr. William Harden, showed 
that on April 12, 1922, the library contained 41,116 volumes, 
and has since that date acquired 104 volumes, making a total 
of 41,220 volumes now in the library. This number, how- 
ever, includes" the collection of government documents, which 
is now undergoing examination with a view to disposing of 
such of them as are not of importance to the Society's li- 
brary. As the work is still in progress, it is impossible at 
this time to give lany accurate statement of the number of 
documents Avhich will eventually be disposed of. For the 
same reason, the number of pamphlets now in the library is 
not estimated in this report. A year ago the number of 
pamphlets was reported at 28,215. 



Eighty-Fourth Annual Meeting 73 

LIBRARY RE-ORGANIZATION 
The following is the report submitted by Mr. Thompson : 

To the Officers and Curators of the Georgia Historical So- 
ciety : 

Several months ago permission was obtained from the 
Superintendent of Documents to make a division of the col- 
lection of Government Documents which have been accumu- 
lating in the Society's library for a great many years, under 
the provision of the Documents Office whereby one copy of 
every book and every pamphlet issued by the Government 
was sent to the library. Under the division of this collection 
which was authorized, the Society was enabled to retain for 
its use whatever documents it desired, the Public Library 
was to take whatever it wished, and the remainder were to 
be sent back to Washington. This arrangement was unques- 
tionably wise, for the document collection contained many 
thousands of books and pamphlets, many of them very 
important, but la larger number still of little or no importance 
except for the largest libraries and libraries devoted to special 
fields. The collection had attained such size that the Society 
could not possibly continue to house it all and to take care of 
the constantly increasing number of documents in the space 
at its disposal. 

After Mr. Harden had indicated which publications he 
would like to keep, I began going through the collection, to 
make the necessary division, and finished the task as far as 
the room in the basement was concerned which was wanted 
for the Colonial Dames. I have been unable to complete the 
main part of the work, until recently it became imperative to 
proceed with it at once in order that space might be made 
on the main floor for the books which we will deposit here 
as the beginning of our branch collection. This work is now 
going ahead as rapidly as possible, and I hope that we shall 
have everything in readiness so that the branch can be 
opened not later than March i, and perhaps a few days 
sooner. 



74 Georgia Historical Society 

In the process of shifting books from the main floor to 
the balcony, we have been doing somewhat more than was 
absolutely necessary to secure enough space to accommodate 
the new books which the Public Library will put in. It seemed 
desirable to remove a large enough number to enable us to 
put all the books on the main floor in better order than the 
crowded condition has permitted hitherto, and to give all 
the shelving and all the books a very thorough cleaning, in 
order that the entire collection might be well and attractively 
arranged for public use and also for the greater convenience 
of the Society's members. 

If it meets with the approval of the Curators, I should 
like to go still further beyond what the establishment of the 
public branch will necessitate, and make certain changes 
which I feel would be advantageous to the Society itself. 
Briefly, these changes would consist of the careful examina- 
tion, as rapidly as may be possible, of the entire collection of 
books, and the discarding of . all books which have outlived 
their usefulness, or which have no value either as pertaining 
to the special field of the Historical Society or as books of 
general interest. 

At present all of the Society's collection of periodicals, 
consisting of extremely valuable files of many of the most im- 
portant magazines, is stored in the basement, under conditions 
which not only make it practically impossible to make the mag- 
azines available, but are damaging to the books. Also stored 
in the basement are many other books, some of them very 
valuable, for which place ought to be provided upstairs where 
they could be taken care of and made available to readers. 
This can not be done unless we go over the whole collection, 
as I have suggested, and discard all that is of no importance. 
If this is done, it will result in a somewhat smaller number 
of volumes being reported in the annual statistical state- 
ment, but this is a matter which surely need not receive con- 
sideration, for a much smaller collection, if well arranged, 



Eighty-Fourth Annual Meeting 75 

well cataloged, and instantly available to anyone, would be 
far more valuable than a collection of many times the size 
which is not so arranged. 

How many volumes there are which might well be dis- 
carded I can not now estimate. Extreme care should of 
course be taken to discard nothing which is of historical im- 
portance, bibliographical value, or general interest. But 
there are many books which have no such value, and which 
will never be wanted, or will be wanted so extremely seldom 
that in my opinion the Society is not justified in keeping them 
any longer at the expense of being unable to care properly for 
the really important parts of its collection. There is a possi- 
bility that somebody, sometime, may want some Government 
publication which we have sent back to Washington, but we 
are proceeding on the theory that we can no longer afford 
to save all the documents on the remote possibility that, if 
we discard any of them, we may discard an occasional volume 
which may at some future time be wanted by some individual. 
The same plan, in my opinion, should be followed with the 
entire collection, proceeding so cautiously that if any of the 
discarded books should ever be called for we need feel no 
shame at having disposed of them. 

The plans of the Public Library contemplate the prepa- 
ration of an adequate catalog of the Society's entire collec- 
tion, a great part of which is not now cataloged. It is also 
our plan to place on deposit here a considerable number of 
historical books which have been acquired by the Public 
Library and are not in the Society's library, and to deposit 
here also such historical books as we may acquire in the 
future which would be more appropriate here than in the 
Public Library's own building. In this way the entire his- 
torical resources of the city, with the exception of course of 
the DeRenne Library, will be available in one place, and in 
the most fitting place, the home of the Georgia Historical 
Society. As these plans are developed, I believe the co- 



76 Georgia Historical Society 

operation which has again, happily, been established between 
the Society and the City, will be mutually advantageous to 
both. The recommendations which I have made, however, 
are entirely irrespective of the Public Library's interests, and 
are made solely because of my interest in the Society itself. 

I should like to recommend, further, that all members of 
the Society who do not live in Savannah, be extended the 
privilege of borrowing by mail any of the Society's books 
which are permitted to be lent to Savannah borrowers, the 
borrower to pay the cost and bear the risk of transportation 
both ways. If this has been permitted in the past, I believe 
the privilege has not been widely advertised or used. By 
extending the privilege, and making it known through the 
pages of the Quarterly, we could offer greater inducements 
to people throughout the state to become members of the 
Society, and would further the purpose of having the Society 
considered as a state-wide institution. 



MEMORIAL OF JUDGE BEVERLY EVANS 

By Andrew J. Cobb 

In the days preceding the War of the Revolution a 
number of Baptists migrated from Wales, seeking a place of 
religious freedom, and settled in Pennsylvania. Among them 
was Rev. Thomas Evans. The Colony of South Carolina 
invited these Welshmen to make their home in that colony, 
and made them grants of land in that portion of the state 
now known as the County of Marion. The Evans family 
thus became identified with South Carolina, and the name 
became a synonym of good citizenship and faithfulness in 
duty in private life and public station. 

A prominent member of the family was Beverly D. 
Evans. He was born in Marion, S. C, but moved to Georgia 
and was admitted to the bar at Dublin, Ga., in 1854. He 
served four years in the Confederate army and was 
Lieutenant-Colonel of the Second Georgia Regiment. His 
military career was one of courage and valor. During the 
war he was married to Miss Sarah Smith of Sandersville, 
Ga. In Sandersville he lived and followed his chosen pro- 
fession until his death, leaving behind him a reputation of 
devotion to the highest principles of life. 

Beverly Daniel Evans, the subject of this sketch, was 
the son of Beverly Daniel Evans the elder and Sarah Smith. 
He was born at Sandersville, Ga., on May 21, 1865. He 
received his early education in the schools of his native 
county and then entered Mercer University, at Macon, Ga., 
graduating with the degree A. B. in 1881, at the age of sixteen. 
In 1882, he received from Mercer University the degree of 
Master of Arts. He pursued his law studies at Yale Uni- 
versity, and, returning home, was in 1884 admitted to the 
bar before Judge Thomas J. Simmons, of the Macon Circuit, 
who was presiding at Sandersville. A mere youth of nine- 



78 Andrew J. Cobb 

teen, he now faced the future in a profession in which, to be 
thoroughly successful, there must be a devotion to high 
ideals, a power of discerning discrimination, and the posses- 
sion of a great soul. 

How thoroughly he measured up to what was expected 
will be manifest as his career is traced step by step. When 
barely eligible, at only twenty-one years of age, he was 
elected a member of the General Assembly, serving one term, 
making a remarkable impression for one so young. Again 
when barely eligible, he was elected Solicitor General of the 
Middle Circuit. During two terms he filled this responsible 
office with signal ability. A touching incident occurring dur- 
ing this time, exhibitive of his great soul, is recorded. He had 
prosecuted to conviction a man on whom the judge had im- 
posed a heavy fine. The wife of the condemned man came 
to him with the story that is so familiar to those who have 
been connected with the administration of the criminal law: 
the worthless husband, the devoted wife, the suffering 
children ; the innocent to be greater sufferers than the guilty. 
She laid upon his desk a few small bills and smaller coin, 
far less than the amount of the fine. She pleaded for time 
to work and pay the balance. He handed back her hard- 
earned money, paid the fine from his own resources, and 
released the criminal into the custody of his faithful wife. 

In 1889, at the age of thirty-four, he was elected Judge of 
the Superior Courts of the Middle Circuit, and occupied this 
position with credit to himself and fearless service to the pub- 
lic. In 1904, at the age of thirty-eight, he was called from the 
Circuit Bench to the Bench of the Supreme Court, being ap- 
pointed by Governor Joseph M. Terrell to fill the vacancy 
caused by the resignation of Associate Justice Henry G. Tur- 
ner. It is interesting to note that he thus became the junior 
member of the Court over which presided as Chief Justice 
the man who, as Judge of the Superior Court, had admitted 
him to the bar twenty years before. He was the youngest 
man ever appointed to a position on the Supreme Bench, with 



Memorial of Judge Beverly Evans 79 

the single exception of Judge Linton Stephens, who was ap- 
pointed at the age of thirty-six. His executive appointment 
was confirmed by the people at the ensuing election, and he 
remained a member of the Court without a hint of opposition 
until his voluntary retirement to accept another call to public 
service. 

From 1907 to 191 7 he was Presiding Justice of the 
Second Division of the Supreme Court, the second highest 
position in the judicial system of the state. The Chief 
Justice only outranks. While a member of the vSupreme 
Court he wrote more than a thousand opinions, and partici- 
pated in the decision of many thousand more. His opinions 
are contained in twenty-eight volumes of the Georgia Reports, 
from 119 to 147 inclusive. His first opinion was in the case 
of Hathcock vs. McGouirk (119 Ga. 973). The controlling 
question there raised was whether, in a quo warranto case, a 
commission issued by the Governor was conclusive upon the 
Courts since the passage of the act providing a method of 
contests in elections of the character in question — a truly 
puzzling question to be dealt with by a young appellate judge 
in his first deliverance. The reading of his opinion demon- 
strates his judicial acumen and portends the reputation that 
was afterward made. 

His last opinion as Presiding Justice was in the case of 
Harden vs. Atlanta (147 Ga. 248). The validity of a city 
ordinance providing for race segregation in residence sec- 
tions was involved. The Court in a former case had ruled 
that another ordinance on the same subject was invalid, for 
the reason that pre-existing property rights were violated. 
The ordinance then under review carefully guarded all rights 
vested at the date of its passage. The Court, speaking 
through Presiding Justice Evans, held, with one justice 
dissenting, that the ordinance was valid. While the Supreme 
Court of the United States in later years expressed views 
that seemed to conflict with the ruling in the Georgia case, a 
close reader of judicial opinions cannot but feel that the rea- 



So Andrew J. Cobb 

soning of the Georgia judge demonstrated that he had a clear 
vision of the indefinable police power, and gave to local con- 
ditions the true respect that all Courts should recognize in 
dealing with the delicate question of delimiting the bounds 
of this power. 

One reads after him with profit, and is impressed with 
the accuracy of his legal instinct, the honesty of his mind, 
and the lucid expression of his thought. 

On September i, 191 7, having on the previous day re- 
signed as Justice of the Supreme Court, he took his seat upon 
the Federal bench as District Judge for the Southern District 
of Georgia. A regret is expressed that the opportunity is not 
afforded the writer to call special attention to some of the 
opinions filed as District Judge, and as a member of the 
Circuit Court of Appeals in which he presided from time to 
time. An examination of these opinions will show his increas- 
ing reputation as a jurist in his new field of work, where 
many perplexing questions were confronted which are peculiar 
to the new jurisdiction he had entered. 

On May i, 1922, Judge Evans, in the prime of life, in 
the active discharge of duty, was suddenly stricken, and at the 
comparatively early age of fifty-seven his career was closed. 

His official career excites our attention and challenges 
our admiration, but his life in office was not by any means 
his whole life. As a citizen he measured up to the full 
requirements. His interest in public affairs was not for 
selfish ends, but for service to his day and generation. 

As a young man of thirty-three he was a delegate to the 
National Democratic Convention of 1888 which nominated 
Grover Cleveland for the Presidency the second time. He 
was a curator of the Georgia Historical Society, and only a 
few days before his death had been elected to the presidency 
of the Society, a position that had been occupied with pride 
by many eminent Georgians, among them Judge John Mac- 
pherson Berrien, the first president. Justice Wayne of the 
Supreme Court of the United States, General Henry R. 



Memorial of Judge Beverly Evans 8i 

Jackson, General A. R. Lawton. He ever took an active 
interest in the affairs of the Georgia Bar Association, re- 
sponding to call for service in that behalf whenever made. 
While immersed in official duty and interested in all matters 
of public concern, he was not unmindful of the more serious 
and important part of life, the due recognition and cultiva- 
tion of the spiritual nature. When we look to his ancestry 
and his environment, we are not surprised to find him in his 
early years a member of the church, and a church that was 
the exponent of the Baptist faith and order. His occupation 
called for changes of residence at times, but no matter 
where his residence, we find him a conspicuous member and 
an active worker in the local church of his faith. 

In 1900 he was one of the vice presidents of the Georgia 
Baptist Convention, and presided over one session of that 
body in such manner that it was iapparent that he was as 
conversant with principles of parliamentary law as he was 
with other branches. During his residence in Savannah he 
was a regular teacher of a Baraca class in the Sunday school 
of his church, a department of work for young men and 
especially those engaged in business or pursuing an edu- 
cation. 

Judge Evans was never opposed for any elective office 
to which he aspired. He was the first person born after the 
War between the States to be elected to the General As- 
sembly. He enjoyed the same distinction as Solicitor General, 
Judge of the Superior Court, Justice of the Supreme Court, 
and Federal Judge of Georgia. 

It has been well said of him that his ''early and con- 
tinued success in life had been in no small degree due to his 
unfailing courtesy and charm of manner, not only to members 
of the bar and litigants, but to every one, from the humblest 
to the highest, with whom he had personal relation." 

Judge Evans was twice married. His first wife was 
Miss Bessie ^^^arthen, of Warthen, Ga., who died in 1892. In 



82 Andrew J. Cobb 

1894 he married Miss Jennie Irwin, of Shorterville, Ala., a 
grandniece of Governor Jared Irwin. 

He is survived by his widow and four sons, Thomas 
Warthen Evans, an attorney at Dublin, Ga. ; Julian Richard 
Evans, a merchant of Sandersville, Ga. ; George Reese Evans, 
now a student in the University of Georgia; and Irwin 
Lumpkin Evans, twelve years of age. Another son, Beverly 
D. Evans, Jr., First Lieutenant, Company D. 20th Machine 
Battalion, Seventh Division, U. S. A., twenty-two years of 
age, was killed in action near Preny, France, on November 
I, 1918, while fighting for his country and the freedom of 
mankind. 

Such, in brief, was the life of our departed brother. 
What an inspiration it must be to those who are left, and who 
were his juniors in years. What a stimulus it is to those who 
were his seniors in years, conscious of the limited time re- 
maining for service to others. 

His whole life may be summed up in one word — faith- 
fulness. He was faithful in every relation, in private life 
and public station. The writer sustained close relations with 
him, admired him as a magistrate, and loved him as a man. 

Let the words as written, though far from adequate to do 
full justice, stand as the simple tribute from a friend and 
former associate in serious and perplexing labor. Some day 
the judicial history of Georgia will be written by a capable 
hand, and when it is, the name of Evans will stand high in 
the judicial annals of the state he loved so well and served 
so faithfully. 



SDItORIAL NOTES 

It has long been felt by the officers of the Georgia His- 
torical Society and by the officers of the Savannah Public 
Library, that a close co-operation between the two institu- 
tions should be effected, which would be equally advantage- 
ous to the Society and to the city of Savannah. Through the 
efforts of Mr. William W. Gordon, the Society's president, 
who is also a member of the board of managers of the Sa- 
vannah Public Library, a co-operative relationship has re- 
cently been established, and plans are now being developed 
under which the Society's library and the Public Library will 
work together to mutual advantage. Under a small appro- 
priation which has been made by the city, a branch of the 
Public Library has been established in Hodgson Hall, which 
is now open to the public every day from 2 to 10 p. m.^ and 
from 4 to 7 p. M. on Sundays. Mr. William Harden, the 
Society's librarian, will be in attendance during his usual 
hours, and the Public Library will also have a librarian on 
duty during all hours mentioned above. 

Under this arrangement, the financial affairs of the 
Society will be improved to some extent by the payment of 
some part of the city's appropriation, as a return for the 
public use of the books of the Society library. The Society 
will benefit also from certain plans which the Public Library 
will develop with the purpose of making the valuable col- 
lection of the Society more readily accessible. Work is now 
in progress which will relieve the over-crowded condition of 
the building, and will permit a more convenient and more 
attractive arrangement of the books. Resident members of 
the Society, and non-resident members when visiting 
Savannah, will have access to the library during longer 
hours than the Society has hitherto been able to maintain. 
The staff of the Public Library will prepare an adequate 
catalog of the books. This task will necessarily cover a long 
period, but will be pushed forward as rapidly as possible. 



84 Editorial Notes 

for such a catalog will greatly facilitate use of the splendid 
resources of the library. The Public Library plans also to 
deposit at Hodgson Hall a considerable number of historical 
books and works of reference which it has acquired, and 
may acquire in the future, which are not in the Society's 
collection but are especially appropriate to the field of his- 
torical research. In this way the entire historical resources 
of Savannah, with exception of the DeRenne Library at 
Wormsloe and other private libraries, will be brought to- 
gether and made readily available at the headquarters of the 
Georgia Historical Society. 



Special attention of the members of the Society who do 
not live in Savannah is called to the action taken by the 
curators at their recent meeting (see page 68), whereby the 
privileges of the Society library are extended to non- 
resident members. Reference works and books of great 
value are of course available only for use in the building, 
but any of the circulating books may be borrowed by non- 
resident members for a period of four weeks, the borrower 
to bear the risk of loss and to pay the expense of insured 
transportation both ways. 

So far as is possible the services of the library will also 
be available to non-resident members in answering ques- 
tions which may be sent by mail, which can be answered 
only from reference material. This service will necessarily 
be limited to questions which can be readily answered in 
reasonably brief form. Time will not permit the librarians 
to undertake extensive research, or to prepare exhaustive 
papers, and requests which involve this can be answered only 
be referring the inquirer to the books in which the desired 
information can be obtained. 



Book reviews 

The Populist Movement in Georgia: A View of the 
"Agrarian Crusade" in the Light of Solid-South Politics. 
By Alex Mathews Arnett, Ph.D. [Columbia University 
Studies in History, Economics and Public Law, Vol. CIV, 
No. I.] (New York: Columbia University, 1922. pp. 239.) 

This study of "the causes, manifestations, and results of 
the Populist movement as they have appeared in Georgia" 
is an interesting and valuable contribution to the political 
and the economic history of Georgia, not only in the 
nineties when the Populists were at their height as a factor 
in American politics, but in the seventies and the eighties, 
when conditions governing the state of the farmers were 
forming the foundations for a third-party revolt. The work 
will also be a most important source for future historians of 
the Populist movement, and will help, as the author desired 
it should, in gaining a true perspective of that movement. 

It was ia difficult task which Prof. Arnett set himself. 
To write a local history of a national movement, when the 
local phases are as closely bound up with the national as 
they were in the Populist movement, inevitably involves 
many difficulties of selection and of exposition. If the na- 
tional aspects are slighted there will be a lack of background 
and of relationship ; if they are over-emphasized the work will 
fail, in large part, of its intended purpose; if the local and 
the national are not skilfully woven together the picture will 
lack clearness. This last difficulty is sometimes apparent in 
Prof. Arnett's treatment of his topic. The transitions from 
national to local, and back again to national, produce an 
effect somewhat similar to the effect of that apparently popu- 
lar device of the moving picture, the "cut back." At some 
points, too, it seems as though national events and issues are 
sketched rather too lightly for an original contribution to the 
history of the People's party as a whole ; and either more 
fully than the Georgia history of the party requires, or with- 



86 Book Reviews 

out clearly establishing any definite relation between the 
events narrated and Georgia's particular part in the movement. 
In the chapter on *'The Embattled Farmers," for example, 
page after page is devoted to discussion of economic and 
financial issues, with only an occasional paragraph touching 
on Georgia's connection with them. 

These weaknesses, however, if such they may be con- 
sidered, are not serious defects, for they are in part due to 
the fact that participation in the Populist revolt in Georgia, 
as in other states, was more concerned with national than with 
local issues ; and in part to the fact that the author was ''more 
intent upon illustrating some of the main currents of Amer- 
ican life in the past fifty years than upon presenting a frag- 
ment of state history." It is the reviewer's opinion, however, 
that the author's purpose of contributing to a perspective 
view of the nation-wide Populist movement would have been 
somewhat better serA^ed if the local history had been more 
fully developed, with only enough of the national phases to 
serve as a background. We should have liked to learn more 
about the strictly local development of Populistic sentiment 
among the voters; of the careers of Felton, Northen, and 
other leaders ; of the steps by which the late Tom Watson 
obtained and strengthened his remarkable hold upon the 
rural communities. All this, however, perhaps reflects per- 
sonal viewpoint, and aside from the lamentable number of 
typographical errors, which extend even to proper names, 
the book is open to no severe criticism. 

The first two chapters give an excellent background for 
the development of the book's main theme. Through the 
two decades, the seventies and eighties, of the ''Bourbon 
Democracy," the leadership of political Georgia was in the 
hands of an "old guard," among whom the most prominent 
were Joseph E. Brown, General John B. Gordon, and General 
Alfred H. Colquitt. It was "essentially a business man's 
regime," and notwithstanding the short-lived Independent 
movement which arose in connection with the Grange and 



The Populist Movement 87 

under the leadership of Dr. Felton, "by the close of the 
eighties the Bourbon Democracy was established upon a rock." 
But the "basis of agrarian dissent," which is the theme of 
the second chapter, was growing rapidly more ominous to 
the rule of the business interests. Under the pernicious crop 
lien system the farmers became a heavily-burdened debtor 
class, and as class feeling became emphasized among them, 
political unity of purpose also began to develop. In Georgia, 
however, there was strong opposition to the introduction of 
politics into the AlUance and to the formation of a third 
party, through fear of a serious division of the white vote 
and a return to the political evils of Reconstruction days. It 
was the conflict between this opposition and the feeling of the 
Populist leaders that the success of the cause depended on 
success in the "solid south," which gave individuality to the 
party struggles in Georgia, 

The value of the book is greatly increased by a number 
of illuminative graphic charts showing the extent of economic 
distress among the farmers, and by several maps showing the 
extent and the distribution of Populist sentiment. The ex- 
tensive bibliography is made unusually valuable by the anno- 
tations with which many of the titles are accompanied. 

C. S. T. 

The English Traveller in America, lyS^-iS^^. By Jane 
Louise Mesick, Ph.D. [Columbia University Studies in 
English and Comparative Literature.] (New York: Columbia 
University Press, 1922. pp. VIII, 370.) 

If Robert Burns had lived in America during the early 
days of the republic, he would have had no occasion to sigh 
for ability "to see oursels as others see us." Travelers came 
in great numbers, from England and other countries, spent 
a few weeks or months among us, and, returning to their 
homes, went hastily into print with accounts of what they 
had seen, or thought they had seen. These books fill a very 



88 Book RevieWs 

important place in the field of Americana. Many of them 
are of little present interest, apart from the historical view- 
point, but many are still interesting on their own merits, and 
it is unfortunate that, so far as the general reading public is 
concerned, most of them have virtually been forgotten. 

Miss Mesick has therefore done a very useful piece of 
work in making this "study of conditions in the United States 
in the fifty-year period after the Revolution, as seen through 
the eyes of English travellers." She has also achieved a 
notable success in her effort "to produce a book which will 
be useful and interesting alike to the student of history and 
of literature." Something of the same kind has been at- 
tempted before, but never before, so far as the reviewer 
knows, has it been done so thoroughly, or with such good 
judgment and skill. The work is based on exhaustive study 
of seventy-eight books. To select from so many accounts, 
in all of which there is much that is trivial, the most signifi- 
cant^ portions ; to dwell at some points on individual views, 
and at others to draw a composite picture representing 
EngHsh opinion in general; to quote judiciously from many 
passages, and to summarize innumerable others, without loss 
of unity and of interest; to weave the whole together, by 
means of wise arrangement and a facile narrative style, into 
a story which could be read with interest, and would give 
the reader an adequate picture of American life as it appeared 
to the traveler; this was the task which Miss Mesick under- 
took, and has accomplished with remarkable success. One 
can hardly be sure which contributes more to the book's in- 
terest, the author's own well-written narrative or the good 
judgment and skill with which the narrative is inter-woven 
with the innumerable citations and extracts. The work is 
sufficiently discriminating, too, to enable the reader to dis- 
tinguish between English comments which were based on 
ignorance or superficiality or rancor, and sounder observa- 
tions which recorded actual facts and pictured conditions as 



The English Traveler 89 

they were. Hence the reader not only sees America, in the 
period covered, as the English saw it, but can construct a 
fairly adequate idea of it as it really was. 

Perhaps the travelers would have done better if they 
had contented themselves with recording what they saw and 
heard, without trying to elucidate what were, to them, strange 
phenomena. ''The general affability which prevailed among 
native Americans was sometimes ascribed to the fact of 
universal suffrage and frequent elections. An American 
never knew when he might wish the political support of his 
neighbors; therefore it behooved him to be agreeable." 
"There was a theory among strangers that Americans had 
taken to incessant smoking to ward off yellow fever," and 
"the habit of constant 'tippling' was ascribed to the effects 
of the extreme heat, which forbade the use of ice water 
without the addition of spirituous liquors." One wonders 
whether William Faux, after his return to England, con- 
tinued the habit which this theory apparently caused him to 
form in America, of preceding every drink of water by "a 
wine glass half full of brandy." In 1794 it was predicted 
that the United States would never become a manufacturing 
people; they "had so few inhabitants and so much land un- 
cultivated that it was not to their interest to engage in 
manufacture. When the country became sufficiently populous, 
it would be much easier to conquer and settle South America 
than to 'go through thie drudgery of fabrication'." Even 
more amusing are the ingenuous reasons advanced by 
Englishmen, who were disturbed by the prospect of a pro- 
tective tariff being erected against them, to prove that 
Americans had nothing to gain by promoting industries, and 
to dissuade them from taking an "unnatural interest in do- 
mestic manufactures." "It must be remembered," to clinch 
the argument, "that a high duty encourages smuggling, which 
would be a simple matter on America's extensive coast-line, 
and the moral effects of which would be appalling." Nothing 
escaped the observation and the comment of our visitors, 



90 Book Reviews 

from our political institutions and moral character to our 
dining-room etiquette and the gait of our women. 

A topical method of treatment was wisely chosen by the 
author as the best for the purpose she sought to accomplish. 
The first two chapters are of an introductory nature, giving 
a general view of the nature of the land to which the curious 
English travelers came, setting forth the various reasons 
which prompted either to travel or to migration, and making 
the reader acquainted with the principal commentaries and 
their authors. The remaining chapters give the English 
views on our manners and customs, our religion, our education 
and literature, and other topics. Foot-note references are 
given for all citations, in happy defiance of the supposed 
popular prejudice against notes in works which are intended 
to be interesting as well as valuable. A carefully prepared, 
adequate index, further facilitates use of the book for refer- 
ence, and writers concerning any phase of early American 
life will do well to consult the book for its bibliographical 
references and for its text. • C. S. T. 



MEMBERS OF 
GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

Adams, Judge Samuel B Savannah, Ga. 

Adamson, W. C Carrollton, Ga. 

Adler, Leopold Savannah, Ga. 

Adler. Mrs. Leopold Savannah, Ga. 

Aiken, Frank D __ _Brunswick, Ga. 

Alexander, Mrs. A. L -Savannah, Ga. 

Alfriend, Kyle T ^/."^^S^^'M^' ^^• 

Allen, Mrs. H. D Milledgeville, Ga. 

Allen, R. E Augusta Ga. 

Alston, Robert C -. Atlanta, Ga. 

Anderson, C. G., Jr Savannah, Ga. 

Anderson, J. Randolph Savannah, Ga. 

Anderson, Mrs. J. Randolph Savannah, Ga. 

Anderson, Mrs. Mary S Savannah, Ga, 

Anderson, Rev. Neal L Savannah, Ga. 

Anderson, Miss Sarah Randolph Savannah, Ga. 

Anderson, W. T Macon, Ga. 

Arkwright, Preston S Atlanta, Ga. 

Armstrong, George F Savannah, Ua. 

Armstrong. L. G Savannah, Ga. 

Ashmore, Otis Savannah, Ga. 

Bacon, Hal H Savannah, Ga. 

Baker, M. S Savannah, Ga. 

Baldwin, George H Jacksonville, Fla. 

Baldwin, George J Savannah, Ga, 

Baldwin, Mrs. George J Savannah, Ga. 

Barnwell, William G Savannah. Ga. 

Barrett, Judge William H Augusta, Ga. 

Barrow, Dr. Craig — Savannah, Ga. 

Barrow, Mrs. Elfrida DeRenne Savannah, Ga. 

Barrow, D. C Athens, Ga. 

Bass, Miss Addie Clarkesv'lle, Ga. 

Bassett. Dr. V. H ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Battey, George M. Jr Atlanta, Ga. 

Beck, Charles G Atlanta, Ga. 

Beckwith, Miss Elizabeth Savannah, Ga. 

Beeson, Mrs. J. L Milledgeville, Ga. 

Bell, Frank G Savannah, Ga. 

Bell, R. G. Cairo, Ga. 

Bennett, Claude N Washington, D. C. 

Bennett, Stanley S Quitman, Ga. 

Benton, Hugh J Waycross, Ga. 

Benton, Mrs. W. N Augusta, Ga. 

Bernd, Miss Florence Macon, Ga. 

Billington, Mrs. Robert Savannah, Ga. 

Blackshear, Archibald Augusta, Ga. 

Blun, Henry Savannah, Ga. 

Blun, Walter S — Savannah, Ga. 

Boland, Dr. F. X Atlanta, Ga, 

Boston Public Library, Boston, Mass. 

Bond, J. Sullivan __ Savannah, Ga. 

Boyd, Willis M Adairsville. Ga. 

Bradley, A. S Swainsboro, Ga. 

Branham, Dr. A. I Atlanta, Ga. 

Brantley, William G Washington, D, C. 

Brantley, William G. Jr! Washington, D, C. 

Brewster, P. H Atlanta, Gd, 

Brock. P. F Macon, Ga. 

Brooks, Prof. R. P Athens. Ga. 

Brown, E. T . Washington, D. C. 

Brown, Elijah A Atlanta, Ga. 

Brown, Louis L. Tr Ft. Valley, Ga 

Brown, Mrs. O. B Berlin, N. H. 

Brown, Miss Sally E Atlanta, Ga. 

Broyles, Arnold , —Atlanta, Ga. 

Broyles, Judge N. R Atlanta, Ga. 



gi 



List of Members 



Bryan, Shepard Atlanta, Ga. 

Bryan, Mrs. W. T Athens, Ga. 

Eullard, Mrs. B. F Savannah, Ga. 

Butler, Col. John G Savannah, Ga. 

Butler, Robert M Savannah, Ga. 

Byck, David A Savannah, Ga. 

Cabell, John L Savannah, Ga. 

Caldwell, Mrs. E. A Monroe. Ga. 

Calhoun, Dr. F. P . Atlanta, Ga. 

Callaway, Judge E. H , Augusta, Ga. 

Callaway, Fuller E LaGrange, Ga. 

Callaway,Merrel P New York, N. Y. 

Campbell, J. Bulow Atlanta, Ga. 

Candler, Judge J. S Atlanta, Ga. 

Candler, Rt. Rev. Warren A Atlanta, Ga. 

Cann, J. Ferris Savannah, Ga. 

Caperton, Capt. J. N Ft. Riley, Kans. 

Carnegie Library of Atlanta Atlanta, Ga. 

Carson, John A. G Savannah, Ga. 

Carswell, John D Savannah, Ga. 

Chapman, Mrs. Lula Quitman, Ga. 

Chesnutt, J. B Savannah, Ga. 

Chipley, Hunt______ Atlanta, Ga. 

Chisholm, Dr. Julian F Savannah, Ga. 

Clay, William L Savannah, Ga. 

Cler, Fred A Savannah, Ga. 

Cobb, Judge Andrew J , Athens, Ga. 

Cobb, Herschel P Savannah, Ga. 

Cobb, John A , Americus, Ga. 

Cobb, Mrs. Maude Barker Atlanta, Ga. 

Cockrell, Fred Savannah, Ga. 

Coerr, Mrs. Audrey Savannah, Ga. 

Coleman, Mrs. John C Swainsboro, Ga. 

Columbus Public Library : Columbus, Ga. 

Comer, Mrs. Lilla C Savannah, Ga. 

Conant, E. R Manchester, N. H. 

Coney, W. M Savannah, Ga. 

Connally, Mrs. E. L Atlanta, Ga. 

Connally, Thomas W Atlanta, Ga. 

Cook, Miss Mary Elvira : Columbus, Ga. 

Cook, Mrs. S. A Milledgeville, Ga. 

Cooke, Mrs. Sarah J Roanoke, Va. 

Coombs, H. H Charleston, S. C. 

Cooper, J. P Rome, Ga. 

Cope, G. E Savannah, Ga. 

Cope, R. S Savannah, Ga. 

Copeland, J. T Dalton, Ga. 

Coulter, Dr. E. M Athens, Ga. 

Crane, Bryson Augusta, Ga. 

Crawford. Dr. W. B Lincolnton. Ga. 

Crisfield, Mrs. J. A. P.___ Chestnut Hill, Pa. 

Crum, W. R Savannah, Ga. 

Cunningham, Mrs. Nora L Savannah, Ga. 

Cunningham, Miss Sarah A Savannah, Ga. 

Cunningham, T. M. Jr Savannah, Ga, 

Cunningham, Mrs. T. M. Jr Savannah, Ga. 

Dailey, Miss Carrie L Atlanta, Ga. 

Dame, Dr. Geo. A Inverness, Fla. 

Daniel, Prof. J. W. W — Macon, Ga. 

Dasher, B. J Macon, Ga. 

Dasher, Mrs. Grace B Savannah, Ga. 

Davis, Mrs. Edwin S Macon, Ga. 

Davis, Fred A Savannah, Ga. 

DeLoach, Dr. A. G Atlanta, Ga. 

DeLoach, R. J. H Chicago, 111. 

DeLorme, Mrs. J. E Savannah, Ga. 

Delquest, A. W Augusta, Ga. 

Demmond, E. K Savannah, Ga. 

Denmark, Miss Emma C Greenville, S. C. 

Denmark, Remer L Savannah, Ga. 

DeRenne, Wymberley W Savannah, Ga. 

DeRenne, Mrs. Wymberley W Savannah, Ga- 

Detroit Public Library Detroit, Mich. 



List of Members 



93 



Doonan, J. T Atlanta, Ga. 

Dorsey, Hugh M Atlanta, Ga, 

Douglas, W. W Savannah, Ga. 

Drewry, James A Griffin, Ga. 

Driscoll, Sidney P Savannah, Ga. 

DuBignon, Henry F Brunswick, Ga. 

Eckstein, Mrs. J. P Savannah, Ga. 

Ellis, Charles Savannah, Ga. 

Ellis, Mrs. Charles ..Savannah, Ga. 

Ellis, George R Americus, Ga. 

Ellis, Robert C Tifton, Ga. 

Ellis, W. D., Jr. ^ Atlanta, Ga. 

Elton, George B Savannah, Ga. 

English, Capt. J. W Atlanta. Ga. 

Erminger, H. B., Jr Macon, Ga. 

Erwin, Mrs. Alexander S Athens, Ga. 

Espy, Carl Savannah, Ga. 

Evans, Lawton B , Augusta, Ga. 

Farmer, Mrs. Lula M Thomson, Ga. 

Felton, Judge W. H Macon, Ga. 

Fetty, Mrs. I. H Savannah, Ga. 

Fish, Judge William H Atlanta, Ga. 

Fitzpatrick, Mrs. Z. I , Madison, Ga. 

Fleming, William H , Augusta, Ga. 

Flippin, Dr. Percy S Macon, Ga. 

Folsom, H. B ^ Mt. Vernon, Ga. 

Foreman, Lauren Atlanta, Ga. 

Foreman, Robert L Atlanta, Ga. 

Fort, Major James A Americus, Ga. 

Foster, John A , Savannah, Ga. 

Franklin, Mrs. H. M Tennille, Ga. 

Freeman. Judge Davis — . Savannah, Ga. 

Fulton, Charles F Savannah, Ga. 

Gaillard, Mrs. B. P Dahlonega, Ga. 

Gamble, Thomas, Jr , — Savannah, Ga. 

Gann, J. M Marietta, Ga. 

Garfunkel, A. J . Savannah, Ga. 

Gazan, Simon N Savannah, Ga. 

Gay, C. E., Jr .. Savannah, Ga. 

George, Jerry Savannah, Ga. 

Gibbs, C. M Savannah. Ga. 

Glenn, Garrard New York N. Y. 

Glover. J. B Savannah, Ga. 

Goetchius, H. R Columbus, Ga. 

Goodrich, Judge L. P , Griffin, Ga. 

Gordon, G. Arthur Savannah, Ga. 

Gordon, Hugh H., Jr Athens, Ga. 

Gordon, W. W Savannah, Ga. 

Gordon. Mrs. W.W : Savannah, Ga. 

Goss, Dr. I. H Athens, Ga. 

Graham. John M ^ Marietta, Ga. 

Grant, John W Atlanta, Ga. 

Gray, Prof. Claude ; Locust Grove, Ga. 

Grayson, William L.— Savannah, Ga. 

Green, Mrs. Metta A Washington, Ga. 

Grice, Warren Macon, Ga. 

Griffin, Dr. Archie Valdosta, Ga. 

Griggs, Mrs. J. M Dawson, Ga. 

Grogan, Judge G. C Elberton, Ga. 

Groover, G. L Savannah, Ga. 

Groves, Charles F Savannah, Ga. 

Groves, Robert W Savannah, Ga. 

Hardee, Noble A Savannah, Ga. 

Harden, William Savannah, Ga. 

Hardwick, W. M Dalton, Ga. 

Harper, Roland M University, Ala. 

Harper, William E Savannah, Ga. 

Harris, J. C . Cave Spring, Ga. 

Harrison, Z. D Atlanta, Ga. 

Harrold, Dr. Charles C Macon, Ga. 

Hay, T. R ., Pittsburgh, Pa. 



94 List of Members 

Haym, Louis H , Brunswick, Ga. 

Hearon, Miss Cleo Decatur, Ga. 

Herman, Carl J Savannah, Ga. 

Herman, Milton T Savannah, Ga. 

Herty, Dr. Charles H New York, N. Y. 

Hiers Dr. J. Lawton Savannah, Ga. 

Hill, Judge H. W , Atlanta, Ga. 

Hilton, Mrs. Joseph ^Nyack, N. Y. 

Hillyer, Judge George , Atlanta, Ga. 

Hirsch, Harold Atlanta, Ga. 

Hitch, Robert M Savannah, Ga. 

Hobby, W. M __Sylvania, Ga. 

Hodgson, Harry .. Athens, Ga. 

Hogan, Mrs. L. P ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Hogan, Walter F , Savannah, Ga. 

Holden, Judge Horace M , Athens, Ga. 

Holder, J. N , Jefferson, Ga. 

Hopkins, Mrs. Elizabeth F Thomasville, Ga. 

Hopkins, M. M Savannah, Ga. 

Horgan, Mrs. D. C Macon, Ga. 

Horrigan, J. J Savannah, Ga. 

Horton, M. C . Atlanta, Ga, 

Howell, Clark . --Atlanta, Ga. 

Howze, Dr. Eva B , Savannah, Ga. 

Hoyt, J. Wallace Atlanta, Ga. 

Huger, Mrs. Catherine B Savannah, Ga, 

Hughes, D. M -Danville, Ga. 

Hull R M Savannah, Ga. 

Hum'phries, Joseph W -Atlanta, Ga. 

Hunt B W Eatonton, Ga. 

Hunt! Prof. H. R Powder Springs, Ga. 

Huxford, Folks HomervUle, Ga. 

Hyde, James Hazen; Life Member — —Pans, France 

Jack, Theodore H ^ Emory University, Ga. 

Jacobs, Dr. Joseph ^ vtw*^' r«' 

Jaudon, Mrs. H. S ^fe!?,"' S' 

Jeffries, Judge T. H ^itl^^^^h ci 

Jenkins H V. Savannah, Ga. 

Johnson, Miss Annie C -Savannah, Ga. 

Johnson, Prof. E. H.__ -. Emory University, Ga. 

Johnson, H. Wiley Savannah, Ga. 

Johnson, J. G Athens, Ga. 

Johnston, G. S , Statesboro. Ga. 

Jones, G. Noble Chevy Chase Md. 

Jones, Dr. Jabez bavannah, Ga. 

Jones, T. A w ^liTu"'^*^' ?*' 

Tones, William F ^ Elberton, Ga. 

Jones, Winfield P Atlanta, Ga. 

Judd, Mrs. Lenna Gertrude _ Dalton, Ga. 

Karow, Mrs. Edward Savannah, Ga. 

Kehoe, William Savannah, Ga. 

Kellogg, Miss Clare --—Rome, Ga. 

Kilpatrick, Dr. W. H ., -New York, N. Y. 

King, Judge Alexander C New Orleans, La. 

King, Major C. B Chicago, 111. 

King, Charles Wm Rome. Ga. 

King, Major Edward P .. Washington, D. C. 

King, J. N Rome, Ga. 

Kiser, Gordon P Atlanta Ga. 

Knight, Lucian Lamar Atlanta, Ga. 

Konemann, C. H ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Krenson, W. D 1 , Savannah, Ga. 

Lamar, Mrs. E. Dorothy Blount Macon, Ga. 

Lamar, G. B , St. Augustine, Fla. 

Lamar, Mrs. Joseph R Atlanta, Ga. 

Lane. Mrs. Julian C ., Statesboro, Ga, 

Lane, Mills B _ 1 Savannah, Ga. 

Lang, J. M.__ , Savannah, Ga. 

Latimer, W. Carroll Atlanta, Ga. 

Lattimore, William , Savannjih, Ga. 

Lawrence, A. A Savannah, Ga. 

Lawrence, Rev. James B „ . Americus, Ga. 



List of Members 95 

Lawton, Alexander R.; Life Member Savannah, Ga. 

Lawton, Mrs. Alexander R . Ir^^^^S' S' 

Lawton, Alexander R., Jr.— IroI^^^S' rl' 

Lawton, Mrs. Alexander R., Jr ___Savannah. Ga. 

Lawton, Beckwith w-?-^T n r 

Lee, Hon. Gordon ^^'c"^°"'.lP'ra' 

Lee, Dr. Lawrence . Savannah, Ga. 

Lefurgey T J _ _ _ bton, ua. 

Leigh, Mrs. 'MabirG:-" ":::-"___ -Savannah. Ga. 

Leopard, Buel --Rome Ga. 

Levy A. B Savannah, Ga. 

Levy' B H I"_~I_ ~- _ Savannah, Ga. 

I,evyi Mrs. 'b~ H'__"I_I_rZZ— .-III-I— I Savannah, Ga. 

Levy, Henry .Savannah, Ga.. 

Levy, S. H Savannah, Ga. 

LcNvis, Mrs. James F.__ Thomaston, Ga. 

Little, John D Atlanta, Ga. 

Long, Prof. Frank T Sutherland, Fla. 

Lott, Warren Waycross, Ga. 

Lovenstein, Lee Roy , Savannah, Ga. 

Low, Mrs. Juliette .Savannah, Ga. 

Loyless, Thomas W . _Atlanta, Ga. 

Lucas, Jonathan Savannah, Ga. 

McAlpin, Judge Henry Savannah, Ga. 

McCain, Prof. J. R ^ Decatur. Ga. 

McCord, Joseph A Atlanta, Ga. 

McCranie, R. A , Savannah, Ga. 

McDaniel, H. D , Monroe, Ga. 

McDaniel, Sanders Atlanta. Ga, 

McElreath, Walter Atlanta, Ga. 

McGehee, C. C Atlanta, Ga. 

Mcintosh, H. M Albany, Ga. 

Mcintosh, H. T , Albany, Ga. 

Mcintosh, O. T Savannah, Ga. 

Mcintosh, Dr. T. M Thomasville, Ga. 

Mackall, William W Savannah, Ga. 

Maclntyre, W. I Thomasville, Ga, 

McKee, Mrs. Betty Council Americus, Ga. 

McKinstry, Mrs. William B Savannah, Ga. 

McNamara, P. J , Savannah, Ga. 

McNeill. Mrs. Lawrence Savannah, Ga. 

McPherson, Dr. J. H. T Athens, Ga. 

Mallard, Wallace W . Savannah, Ga. 

Mallory, Mrs. J. M , Savannah. Ga. 

Marcus, William Savannah, Ga. 

Martin, Dr. H. H , Savannah, Ga. 

Massey, J. D Columbus, Ga. 

Matthews, J. E. F ., . Thomaston, Ga. 

Meader, Richard D , Brunswick, Ga. 

Meldrim, Judge Peter W Savannah, Ga. 

Meldrim, Mrs. Peter W . Savannah, Ga. 

Mell, G. A Athens, Ga. 

Mendel, Carl , Savannah, Ga. 

Mercer, George A. Savannah, Ga. 

Merkle, A. J . Savannah, Ga. 

Michael, M. G , Athens, Ga. 

Millican, W. J Carrollton, Ga. 

Mills, George J , Savannah, Ga. 

Mills, Mrs. George J Savannah, Ga. 

Minis, Abram , Savannah, Ga. 

Minis, J. Florance Savannah, Ga. 

Montgomery, Dr. C. J Augusta, Ga. 

Moon, Judge E. T La Grange, G:i. 

Moore, Louis L Thomasville, Ga. 

Moore, Mrs. S. C -, Macon, Ga. 

Morel, John -. Savannah, Ga, 

Morgan, D. B -r Savannah, Ga. 

Morgan, Horace H., Jr , Savannah, Ga. 

Morris, Mrs. John , Savannah Ga. 

Morris, Sylvanus , Athens, Ga. 

Mott, Prof. J. P , Valdosta, Ga. 

Munford Memorial Library __Cartersville, Ga. 



96 



List of Members 



Murphey, William ; Savannah, Ga. 

Murphy John E ^ Atlanta, Ga. 

Myers, Lee Roy ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Myers, Sigo Savannah, Ga. 

Myrick, Shelby , Savannah, Ga. 

Nannmga, Henry Savannah, Ga. 

Neely, Robert C , Waynesboro, Ga. 

Neville, Mrs. Charles Savannah, Ga. 

New York Public Library , New York, N. Y. 

Newberry Library Z Chicago, 111. 

Newell, A. C _' Atlanta, Ga, 

Nichols, Mongin B , Savannah, Ga. 

Nicolson, Mrs. W. P Atlanta, Ga. 

Noyes, Mrs. E, P Savannah, Ga. 

Nunnally, Mrs. W. H , Monroe, Ga. 

Nutting, James R , Atlanta, Ga. 

Oberdorfer, Eugene Atlanta, Ga. 

O'Byrne, M. A . Savannah, Ga. 

Oemler, J. N Savannah, Ga. 

Oemler, Mrs. J. N Savannah, Ga. 

Oglesby, J. W. Quitman, Ga. 

Oliver, Frank M Savannah, Ga. 

Olmstead, Charles H Savannah, Ga- 

Orme, A. J Atlanta, Ga. 

Orme, Miss Abby New Orleans, La. 

Orr, J. K ..Atlanta, Ga. 

Ottley, Mrs. John K Atlanta, Ga. 

Otto, Olaf , Savannah, Ga. 

Overstreet, Mrs. E, K Sylvania, Ga. 

Owens, George W , Savannah, Ga. 

Palmer, A. B Savannah, Ga. 

Pape, Miss Nina A Savannah, Ga. 

Pardonner, Mrs. W. S Savannah, Ga. 

Park, Mrs. Elmer T Macon, Ga. 

Park, Orville A Macon, Ga. 

Parker, Mrs. T. C Jacksonville, Fla. 

Parks, Benjamin G , Waycross, Ga. 

Paulsen, John F — ., Savannah, Ga. 

Peabody, Charles Samuel; Life Member ^ New York, N. Y. 

Peabody, George Foster; Life Member . New York, N. Y. 

Peeples, Richard D Phoenix, Ariz. 

Pendleton, A. S Valdosta. Ga. 

Phillips, John R Louisville, Ga. 

Phillips, W. L . , Louisville. Ga. 

Phinizy, Barrett Athens, Ga. 

Phinizy, Billups , Athens, Ga. 

Pomeroy, E. E Atlanta, Ga. 

Pottle, J. R Albany, Ga. 

Powell, R. H , Valdosta, Ga. 

Powers, C. M , Quitman, Ga. 

Pierpont, Wallace J ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Pittman, Mrs. C. E Commerce, Ga. 

Platen, H. B Savannah, Ga. 

Pratt, W. N , Savannah, Ga- 

Prescott, Miss Helen M Atlanta, Ga. 

Prescott, W. R .. Atlanta, Ga. 

Price, W. W , Savannah, Ga. 

Pringle, W. A , Thomasville, Ga. 

Puder, J. C._ , Savannah, Ga. 

Quillian, William F Macon, Ga. 

Quint, Jacob H Savannah, Ga. 

Rambo, Mrs. S. D ^ Marietta, Ga. 

Rauers, J. J Savannah, Ga. 

Ravenel, Thomas, P , Savannah, Ga. 

Read, Abram Carrington Savannah, Ga. 

Reagan, Frank 1 ,' Macon, Ga. 

Reed, Harry D Waycross, Ga. 

Reese, Rt. Rev. F. F ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Reese, M. L , Augusta, Ga. 

Reese, Millard , Brunswick, Ga. 

Reid, Prof. W. D Eatonton, Ga. 

Richmond, Mrs. H. L Jacksonville, Fla. 

Robeson, L. B , Marietta, Ga. 



List of Members 97 

Rockwell, C. S ,— Savannah, Ga. 

Roney, Mrs. F. E El Dorado, Ark. 

Rosenthal, E. W. Savannah, Ga. 

Ross, Mrs. Edgar A ^ Macon, Ga. 

Ross, Samuel Savannah, Ga. 

Rourke, John Jr ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Rowlinski, Robert A Savannah, Ga. 

Rucker, J. H , Athens, Ga. 

Russell, N. D Brunswick, Ga. 

Rutherford, Miss Mildred , Athens, Ga. 

St. Louis Mercantile Library Association St. Louis, Mo. 

Sanford, D. S Milledgeville. Ga. 

Sasser, J. A : , Atlanta, Ga. 

Saussy, Gordon ' Savannah, Ga. 

Saussy, Mrs. Gordon, ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Screven, Mrs. Elizabeth M Savannah, Ga. 

Sell, Prof. E. S ^ Athens, Ga. 

Sellers, Judge A. V .Baxley, Ga. 

Semmes, Mrs. R. T Savannah, Ga. 

Shipp, J. E. D .Americus, Ga. 

Shope, Theron S , Dalton, Ga. 

Sirmans, W. E Waycross, Ga. 

Slack, H. R , LaGrange, Ga. 

Slaton, John M Atlanta, Ga. 

Slaton, Mrs. John M Atlanta, Ga. 

Small, Mrs. Edna Ward Winn Valdosta, Ga. 

Smart, Horace P Savannah, Ga. 

Smith, Archibald Atlanta, Ga. 

Smith, Mrs. C. Buford Savannah, Ga. 

Smith, C. W — Savannah, Ga. 

Smith, J. G .Savannah, Ga. 

Smith, Marion - Atlanta, Ga. 

Smythe, Mrs. Leila Rains Augusta, Ga. 

Solomon, Arthur W : Savannah, Ga. 

South Georgia State Normal College Valdosta, Ga. 

Spalding, Mrs. Ella Barrow , Savannah, Ga. 

Spalding, Jack J Atlanta, Ga. 

Spencer, Henry B Washington, D. C. 

Spicer, J. C , Savannah, Ga. 

Stark, Judge W. W Commerce, Ga. 

Steed, W. E Butler, Ga. 

Stephens, William _ B , Savannah, Ga. 

Stephens, Mrs. William B Savannah, Ga. 

Stevens, Henry D Savannah, Ga. 

Stovall, P. A , Savannah, Ga. 

Strachan, Harry G. ; Life Member , Savannah, Ga. 

Strickland, Alonzo J Blackshear, Ga. 

Strickland, J. J ^ Athens, Ga. 

Strobhar, A. D Savannah, Ga. 

Strobhar, W. G . . Savannah, Ga. 

Strozier, Harry S Macon, Ga. 

Strozier, Mrs. J. L Greenville, Ga. 

Surrency, Mrs. Julia A. F Gardi, Ga. 

Swift, H. H Columbus, Ga. 

Teasdale, W. H , Savannah, Ga. 

Tedcastle, Mrs. Agnes Bevill Hyde Park, Mass. 

Thomas, Mrs. E. A Atlanta, Ga. 

Thomas, Robert , Thomasville, Ga. 

Thompson, Miss C. Mildred , Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 

Thompson, C. Seymour .- ^Savannah, Ga. 

Thornton, Mrs. A. E., Sr _ Atlanta, Ga. 

Travis, John L Savannah, Ga. 

Trosdal, E. S Savannah, Ga. 

Turner, S. M Quitman, Ga. 

Twitty, F. E ^ Brunswick, Ga. 

Twitty, J. E Sylvania, Ga. 

Tyson, Charles M Darien, Ga. 

University of Georgia Library Athens, Ga. 

University of Chicago Chicago, 111. 

Van Keuren, R ^ Savannah, Ga. 

Varnedoe, James O , Valdosta, Ga. 

Vereen, W. C , Moultrie, Ga. 

Vocelle, J. T St. Mary's Ga. 

Wade, John D Athens, Ga. 



98 



List op Members 



Waite, A. H., Jr Savannah, Ga. 

Walker, Mrs. Annie K Cuthbert Ga. 

Walker, George P , , Savannah, Ga. 

Walker, Harry N Savannah, Ga. 

Walker, Mrs. J. L Waycross, Ga. 

Walker, W. J Sylvania, Ga. 

Wallin, Henrik , Savannah, Ga. 

Walsh, Miss Joanna E Savannah, Ga. 

Waring, Dr. T. P . Sav^inah, Ga. 

Weber, Herman Savannah, Ga. 

Weed, Rt. Rev. E. G Jacksonville, Fla. 

Weitman, George M , Savannah, Ga. 

Wessels, Fred, Jr , , Savannah, Ga. 

West, C. W Savannah, Ga. 

Whipple, U. V Cordele, Ga. 

White, Dr. George R , Savannah, Ga. 

White, Mrs. Julia A Athens, Ga. 

White, Miss Willie S Dalton, Ga. 

Whitner, Charles F Atlanta, Gs. 

Whitner, Thomas C Atlanta, Ga. 

Willcox, A. Miles Savannah, Ga. 

Williams, Rev. M. S Athens, Ga. 

Williamson, William W Savannah, Ga. 

Wilson, Mrs. A. McD ^ Atlanta, Gd. 

Wilson, Mrs. Walter S , Savannah, Ga. 

Wilson, William L Savannah, Ga. 

Wilson, Mrs. William L Savannah. Ga. 

Wimpey, W. E Clarkston, Ga. 

Winburn, William A Savannah, Ga. 

Wood, Mrs. J. S Savannah, Ga. 

Worth, Miss Rhoda Savannah, Ga. 

Wright, Anton P Savannah, Ga. 

Wright, Boykin , Augusta, Ga. 

Wright, George W Augusta, Ga 

Yancey, Hon. Hamilton . Rome, Ga. 

Yow, S. B . Lavonia, Ga. 

HONORARY MEMBERS 

Hyvernat, Prof. Henry Washington, D. C. 

Mackall, Leonard L Savannah, Ga. 

Phillips, Ulrich , Ann Arbor, Mich. 

CORRESPONDING MEMBERS 

Brooks, William Fay Philadelphia, Pa. 

Cross, E. J. D Baltimore. Md. 

Doggett, Samuel B , Boston, Mass. 

Manchester, Rev. Alfred Salem, Mass. 



BRAID & HUTTON, INC. 

PRINTERS 

[O WHITAKER, ST., SAVANNAH, GA. 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 

QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



,VOL. VII No. 2 



JUNE. 1923 



• • 



I 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 

QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 2 



JUNE. 1923 



One Dollar a Number Three Dollars a Year 



Entered as second-class matter, April 19, 1923, at the post office at 
Savannah, Ga., under the Act of August 24, 1912. 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

OFFICERS 

President Vice-President 

WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING ^ Atlanta 

First Vice-President Vice-President 

R. P. BROOKS Athens LAWTON B. EVANS J^ugusta 

Vice-President Secretary-Treasurer 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah CHARLES F. GROVES Savannah 

Librarian 
WILLIAM HARDEN Savannah 

CURATORS 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah HENRY R. GOETCHIUS Columbus 

R. P. BROOKS Athens WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah 

MRS. B. F. BULLARD Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING Atlanta 

ANDREW J. COBB J^thens MRS. A. R. LAWTON Savannah 

T. M. CUNNINGHAM, Jr Savannah A. C. NEWELL Atlanta 

LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta ORVILLE A. PARK Macon 

P. S. FLIPPIN Macon MRS. GORDON SAUSSY Savannah 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON Savannah 

BOARD OF EDITORS 

ROBERT PRESTON BROOKS... University of Georgia 

ELLIS MERTON COULTER University of Georgia 

PERCY SCOTT FLIPPIN Mercer University 

MANAGING EDITOR 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON 
Savannah Public Library 



CONTENTS 

The Atlanta Campaign (II) 

Thomas Robson Hay 99 

Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County, New Jersey. 

William W, Gordon 119 

Crawford Williamson Long and the Discovery 
of Anesthesia. 

Frank K. Boland, M. D 135 

The Yazoo Fraud. 

Hon. Samuel B. Adams 155 

"Memento Mori." 

Elfrida DeRenne Barrow 166 

Editorial Notes -.174 

Book Reviews ,..„, 178 



CThe Qeorgid tiislorical Quarterly 

UolumeUll JUNE. 1923 Number 2 



THE ATLANTA CAMPAIGN 
By Thomas RoBsoN Hay 

[CONTINUED FROM MARCH ISSUE] 

From the 22nd to the 27th of July, the Federal com- 
manders were busily engaged in securing and repairing 
their communications; in re-adjusting their lines; in 
making preparations to meet any attacks ; and in resting 
and re-organizing the tired troops. Hardee's men re- 
mained in occupation of the ground they had won on the 
22nd. General Stephen D. Lee had been promoted to 
Lieutenant-General and transferred from Mississippi, 
and assigned to the command of Hood's old corps, which 
had been temporarily under the command of General 
B. F. Cheatham. This command and General A. P. 
Stewart's corps were on the left of the Confederate line. 

On July 27 Sherman moved the Army of the Ten- 
nessee, now commanded by General 0. 0. Howard, who 
had been appointed to the command in General McPher- 
son's place, from its position on the left of the Federal 
line across the right of the line and to the west of At- 
lanta, his plan of action being to cut the railroad from 
Atlanta to the south. Grant had advised Sherman that 
he must push matters, as it was reported that Hood 
would be re-enforced. ^^ To meet this maneuver, and to 
safeguard his communications. General Hood ordered 
General Lee to move his force so as to prevent Howard's 
troops from gaining any points of vantage. General Lee 
was ordered to take up a position nearly parallel to the 



86 Sherman. 2 :87-88 ; O. O. Howard, Autobiography, 2 :17. 



100 Thomas R. Hay 

Lick Skillet Road and running through Ezra Church. 
Sherman had not expected that Howard would be at- 
tacked, but that officer believed otherwise and consequent- 
ly proceeded cautiously, keeping his troops well in hand. 
Stewart's corps was to remain in support of Lee, and on 
the 29th he was to move around Howard's flank and at- 
tack him in rear. Hardee's corps and the Georgia State 
troops were ordered to occupy the works vacated by Lee 
and Stewart, facing Thomas and Schofield. Lee's com- 
mand, moving forward, came in contact with Howard's 
troops in the vicinity of Ezra Church. The Confederates 
were unable to dislodge their opponents, who had thrown 
up hasty earthworks and who were also protected by logs 
and rails. Repeated attacks were made. Lee was so 
badly used that Stewart's corps was ,sent to his support. 
All efforts to defeat the enemy were repulsed, and during 
the night, by Hood's orders, Lee's and Stewart's com- 
mands were withdrawn into the works immediately 
around Atlanta. *^ 

It is interesting to note, in view of Hood's repeated 
attempts to blame Hardee for the failures about Atlanta, 
that on the 28th he should have sent this officer to take 
command at Ezra Church, on a field where there was no 
portion of his corps, and where nearly two-thirds of the 
army was engaged. Hardee proceeded as directed, but 
arrived after the fighting had practically ceased, and 
therefore found it unnecessary to assume command. 
Hood makes no mention or explanation of his action in 
this case, and in both his report and his book he passes 
lightly over the battle as if it were a chance and unimpor- 
tant meeting. «* 

During the month of August no actions of moment 
occurred. The days were hot and sultry. Sherman had 



87 Howard's Report, O. R. 38, part 3 :40-41 ; Logan's Report, Ibid. : 83 : 
Hood's Report, Ibid. :632 ; Lee's Report, Ibid. :762 ; Stewart's Report, Ibid. :872 ; 
Cox. Atlanta, 183-85; Hood, 194; Hardee's Report, O. B. 38, part 3:699; Roy, 
S. H. S., 8 :3e9-70 ; O. O. Howard, Autobiography, 2 :18-20. 

88 Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 3:699; Roy, S. H. S., 8:369-70. 



The Atlanta Campaign 101 

been using his superior cavalry forces to interfere, as 
much as possible, with Hood's line of communications. 
Howard continued his encircling movement to the south 
and west, Thomas and Schofield being left to hold the 
Confederates in their positions about Atlanta. By virtue 
of superior forces, Sherman could maneuver practically 
at will, and force Hood to come out from behind his forti- 
fications and attack at a disadvantage or be surrounded. 
Schofield, with the Army of the Ohio, soon followed How- 
ard, leaving only Thomas in front of Atlanta. By the 
4th of August, Schofield was in front of East Point, to 
the south of Atlanta. Wheeler, with Forrest, made con- 
tinued raids on Sherman's railroad line from Chatta- 
nooga and repeatedly engaged the Federal cavalry, with 
varying degrees of success. ** 

In spite of the numerous cavalry raids that Sher- 
man's cavalry had carried out, that officer had become 
convinced that nothing of consequence could be accom- 
plished by such operations. *^ Accordingly, the 20th 
corps, under General H. W. Slocum, was left to guard the 
railroad to the north of Atlanta, and on August 25 a 
general movement of the main army was begun, the 
Federal troops marching out to the west and south of 
Atlanta to cut Hood's communications at Jonesboro. On 
the 28th the entire army, with the exception of the troops 
left to watch Atlanta, began a general right wheel, piv- 
oting on Schofield, stationed in front of East Point. The 
Federal line was formed with Schofield on the left, 
Thomas in the center, and Howard on the right. ^^ 

On the 30th of August it became evident to Hood 
that Sherman's objective was Jonesboro, and, to prevent 
the capture of this place, Hardee was ordered to take his 
own corps, commanded by Cleburne, and Lee's corps to 
that place, and drive the enemy across the Flint River. 



89 Sherman, 2 :85, 96fE ; Steele. 1 :546 ; Hood, 197-99 ; DuBoae, 365flf. 

90 Sherman, 2:98. 

91 Sherman, 2:105; Cox, Atlanta. 198-99. 



102 Thomas R. Hay 

Stewart's corps and the Georgia State troops remained to 
defend Atlanta. Hood at first believed Sherman to be 
retreating for want of supplies, and it was only after 
being convinced of his error that he ordered Hardee's 
movement. By this time the enemy had actually reached 
Jonesboro. ** 

Hardee arrived at Jonesboro before daylight of the 
31st, expecting to find Cleburne and Lee there. Cleburne 
had set out, as directed, and had marched the entire night, 
but found that Federal troops of Howard's command 
were already on the road he was expected to take. He 
was forced to open a new road, thus being much delayed, 
and it was 9 A. M. of the 31st before he got into position. 
Part of Lee's corps, which followed, got into line two 
hours later, the balance arriving at 1.30 p. M. Hardee, 
perceiving that the delay in the arrival of the troops had 
given the enemy time to intrench and make ready for the 
expected attack, telegraphed Hood, suggesting that he 
come in person to Jonesboro and take command. Hood 
deemed it unwise to leave Atlanta. Hood later stated 
that he had had no word from Hardee. ^* 

As soon as the lines could be adjusted, Hardee or- 
dered the attack, Cleburne taking position on the left and 
Lee on the right. Cleburne had orders to turn the 
enemy's right flank, Lee to begin his attack in front when 
he heard Cleburne's guns. Lee, mistaking the firing of 
Cleburne's skirmishers for the main attack, began his 
movement before Cleburne was seriously engaged. He 
encountered formidable opposition from the Federal 
troops, posted behind breastworks, and was repulsed with 
loss and driven back in confusion. Cleburne's main at- 



92 Hood's Report, O. R. 38, part 3 :633 ; Hardee's Report, Ibid. :700 ; How- 
ard, Autobiography, 2:36. 

93 Hood's Report, O. R. 38, part 3 :631 ; Hardee's Report, Ibid. :700 ; Lee's 
Report, Ibid. :764 ; Buck, 292 ; Cox, Atlanta. 199 ; Hood, 205-6 ; Major Calhoun Ben- 
ham, Cleburne's Chief of Staff, in a sketch of General Cleburne, in the Kennesaw 
Gazette for Nov. 1, 1889, says: " . . . . owing to the . . . fatigue of the men . . . 
[they] dragged themselves along, constantly recurring halts protracting" the 
march. 



The Atlanta Campaign 103 

tack was proceeding successfully. General Hardee called 
on General Lee to ascertain whether his troops were in a 
condition to renew the attack. General Lee was of the 
decided opinion that they were not. Immediately after 
this, General Hardee, on being informed that the enemy 
was moving to attack Lee, directed Cleburne to send his 
own division under General Lowry, to Lee's support. Be- 
cause of this fact, Cleburne was. compelled to remain in 
position on the defensive. No attack was made on Lee, 
and night closed the battle. ** During the evening Hardee 
received a message from Hood, dated 6 P. m., directing 
bim to return Lee's corps to Atlanta to help defend that 
place from an expected attack. Hood was still under the 
impression that the greater part of Sherman's forces 
were in front of Atlanta, whereas, as we have seen, all 
the Federal troops had been withdrawn, except the 20th 
corps. On Hood's own admission, this order to Hardee 
was issued without knowing what had been accomplished. 
The withdrawal of Lee's corps made it necessary for Har- 
dee to cover, with one corps, the ground which had been 
occupied by two. ^^ 

On the morning of the next day (September 1) , Hood 
was at Atlanta with Stewart's corps and the Georgia 
State troops; Hardee, with his own corps and the sub- 
sistence and ordnance trains of the army, which had been 
sent to him for safe-keeping, was at Jonesboro, thirty 
miles south of Atlanta ; and Lee's corps was on the road 
between Jonesboro and Atlanta, fifteen miles distant from 
either place and within supporting distance of neither. 

Cleburne's division was shifted to the right of Har- 
dee's line, and by 1.30 P. M. of the 1st had taken up its 
position, which was generally in a north and south direc- 
tion, facing west and parallel to the railroad. The line, 



94 Hardee's Report, O. R. 88, part 3 :700 ; Lee's Report, Ibid. :764 ; Hood. 
205-6 ; Buck, 295. 

95 Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 3 :701 ; Buck, 296 ; Roy. S. H. S., 8 :373 ; 
Hood, 205. Hood does not mention the withdrawal of Lee in his Report or his 
book. 



104 Thomas R. Hay 

which had been previously occupied by Lee's corps, was 
badly selected and close to the enemy. An inferior line 
of intrenchments was only partially completed. On ac- 
count of the necessary changes of alignment, in order to 
take advantage of the terrain a slight salient was made 
in the left of Govan's brigade of Cleburne's corps. The 
direction on the right of Cleburne's line was thus partially 
changed from a north and south direction to one facing 
north and making a right angle with the remainder of 
the division and corps. At 3 P. M. the enemy moved to 
the attack, and, although the first assault was repulsed, 
it was repeated in greater force. Govan's line was 
broken, the salient pushed in, and General Govan with a 
large part of his brigade taken prisoners. The fight con- 
tinued until dark. ^^ In the meantime. General Sherman, 
who was present in person, was hurrying up his troops 
from the north, hoping to surround and capture Hardee 
with his entire corps. Though in great peril of capture, 
Hardee was able not only to save the trains committed 
to his charge, but, by skilful handling, to withdraw his 
entire command in safety. Hood states that on the ar- 
rival of the re-enforcements under Stewart, the battle 
ceased. No re-enforcements were received by Hardee 
during or after the contest. At about 11 P. M., Hardee 
began the withdrawal of his troops, and set them in mo- 
tion toward Love joy's Station, four miles to the south of 
Jonesboro, where he was later joined by Lee's and Stew- 
art's corps, having previously repulsed several attacks 
made on him on the 2nd. ^"^ 

Hardee's inability to hold Jonesboro and keep the 
railroad open, necessitated the prompt evacuation of At- 
lanta. At 5 P. M. on the 1st, Hood, with Stewart's corps 
and the Georgia State troops, marched out southward 



96 Buck, 296-98; Roy, S. H. S., 8:373; Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 
8 :702. 

97 Sherman's Report, O. R. 38, part 1:81-82; Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, 
part 3:701-2; Lee's Report, Ibid. :764 ; Stewart's Report, Ibid. :872 ; Sherman, 
2 :108 ; Hood, 208-9 ; Roy, S. H. S., 8 :374 ; Cox, Atlanta, 207. 



The Atlanta Campaign 105 

in the direction of Love joy's Station. By the 4th, the 
entire army was assembled at that place . Sherman re- 
mained facing Hood for several days, having notified 
President Lincoln that "Atlanta is ours and fairly won." 
On the 5th of September orders were issued for a with- 
drawal of the Federal army to Atlanta. Sherman deemed 
it advisable not to pursue Hood farther, but to give his 
troops a short period of much needed rest and to think out 
a plan for the coming operations. The Atlanta campaign 
was ended, but the Confederate army was still at large 
and it was in a condition for the one last desperate stroke 
of its career — ^the campaign into Tennessee in the fall 
and winter of 1864. »« 

COMMENTS. 

The interesting features of the Atlanta campaign 
are : Johnston's handling of his army in retreat ; the fail- 
ure of Sherman, with his superior forces, to make the 
most of his successes, thereby prolonging the campaign ; 
the removal of Johnston from command and his super- 
session by Hood; Hood's lack of confidence in his army 
and his controversies with Hardee; and Hood's reversal 
of the method of opposing Sherman's advance by chang- 
ing from a passive defensive to an aggressive offensive. 
These points will be touched on briefly. Space forbids 
any detailed and extended discussion of the Davis-Hood- 
Johnston controversy, with its bitterness in accusation 
and counter-accusation, nor does such a discussion come 
within the province of this study. ^^ 

Johnston's retreat was skilfully conducted, and was 
carried out with a minimum loss of men and materials, 
and though with an inferior force, he successfully pre- 



98 A MS by the author entitled HOOD'S TENNESSEE CAMPAIGN, which 
critically considers this invasion of Tennessee, was awarded the Robert M. John- 
ston Prize, by the American Historical Association, December, 1920, for the best 
essay on a subject in military history. It is expected that this essay will soon be 
published in book form. 

99 This whole controversy will be found discussed in its various aspects 
in Narrative. 349-54 and 363-70 ; Hood, 69-160 , R & F, 2 :555-61 ; and in an essay 
by the author, soon to be published. 



106 Thomas R. Hay 

vented his opponent from advancing at more than an 
average rate of a mile a day, his operations were, never- 
theless, fundamentally, merely a passive defensive. It 
should also be noted that Sherman's advance was retarded 
as much by inclement weather and bad roads, as by any 
resistance offered by Johnston. ^^^^ Perhaps a better 
method of opposing Sherman's advance would have been 
for Johnston to have drawn off to the southwest in the 
direction of Rome, Ga., making use of the Oostenaula 
River to protect his flank, and receiving his supplies from 
Selma and Mobile in Alabama. Arrived at Rome, he 
could have taken position behind the Etowah River, with 
his flank protected by the Coosa River. Such a position 
would have enabled him to have struck effectively at 
Sherman's flank, and to have interfered with his long 
Kne of communications coming south from Chattanooga 
and Dalton. Sherman would have had to turn away from 
the railroad and from Atlanta, the geographical and po- 
litical objective of the campaign, to follow him. Political 
consideration and the dictation of the President and the 
Richmond authorities no doubt would have prevented 
such a move of Johnston's, as the safety of Atlanta, not 
the preservation of the Confederate army as an effective 
fighting machine, was the primary requirement of the 
Confederate strategy. ^^^ (It was this same fallacy that 
hampered Lee in all his operations in Virginia.) In 
spite of his skill, it is true that Johnston "had never 
fought but one aggressive battle, the battle of Seven 
Pines, which was phenomenally mismanaged." ^^* Con- 
sidering the campaign in its larger aspects, it should be 
noted that the importance to the Confederacy of defeating 
Sherman's operations against Atlanta was not to be 
measured by military consequences alone. Political con- 
siderations of magnitude and of far-reaching possibilities 



100 Steele, 551. 

101 Ibid.; R & F, 2:557; Sherman, 2:109; Narrative, 868. 

102 Alexander, 577. 



The Atlanta Campaign 107 

were also involved. The Northern Democrats had pro- 
nounced the war a failure ; a strong peace party had come 
into being; and the impending presidential elections in 
the North were to turn on immediate peace or continued 
war. Lee, in Virginia, had fought Grant to a stand-still, 
and, as the Northern newspapers greatly exaggerated the 
military importance of Atlanta, the failure of Sherman 
to capture it would have gone against the Lincoln admin- 
istration and would have put it farther into disfavor. 

The only two mistakes of any consequence with 
which Sherman has been taxed were: first, his error in 
not sending a larger force through Snake Creek Gap, in 
the first days of the campaign, to turn Johnston's position 
by taking Resaca ; and, second, his assault of the strong 
intrenched position at Kennesaw Mountain on June 27, 
instead of continuing the turning movement. In the first 
case, however, McPherson's command was large enough 
to accomplish the task assigned to it, had he (McPher- 
son) not overestimated the strength of the force opposing 
him. This error was due, perhaps, to the lack of efficient 
cavalry reconnoitering patrols. His command also lacked 
provisions, and was reported to have been tired. ^^^ Why 
Johnston did not place a larger force to guard this impor- 
tant point (Snake Creek Gap) , has never been satisfac- 
torily explained. The failure to do so was a great blunder 
for which Johnston, himself, was to blame. In the second 
case, Sherman's reasons for assaulting the Confederates 
on Kennesaw Mountain were that he hoped to break 
through, near the center, and, while holding one flank of 
Johnston's army in check, he expected to be able to over- 
whelm and destroy the other. ^^* 

Still a third cardinal mistake, was at Love joy's Sta- 
tion after the battle of Jonesboro, when Sherman had a 
chance to destroy Hood's army in detail. Hardee, after 
his retreat from Jonesboro on the night of September 

108 McPherson's Report, O B. 38, part 3:16-17. 
104 Sherman, 2:60. 



108 Thomas R. Hay 

1st, took up a position at Lovejoy's Station, while Hood, 
with Stewart's and Lee*s corps and the Georgia State 
troops, was marching south from Atlanta. Hood's troops 
had to make a flank march by the heads of Sherman's 
three armies. Hood, himself, says : "I have often thought 
it strange Sherman should have occupied himself with 
attacking Hardee's intrenched positions instead of falling 
upon our main body on the march round to his rear." ^^^ 
However, Sherman's reasons for not attacking were two- 
fold. He believed Lee to be within supporting distance 
of Hardee, a logical presumption under the circumstance? 
and without positive evidence to the contrary. He could 
not imagine that Lee had been ordered back to Atlanta. 
Sherman's obvious move was to interpose as much of his 
army as possible between Hardee and the rest of Hood's 
army, and this was just what he was trying to do. His 
cavalry brought no information of the movements of 
either Lee's corps or the rest of Hood's army. In fact, 
throughout the campaign. General Sherman was very 
poorly served by his cavalry, and, generally, had to depend 
on superficial observations and inferential deductions to 
determine just what the conditions were in the front of 
his army. Again, as at Resaca and at New Hope Church, 
the Confederate line of retreat was left open. ^^^ 

Sherman's operations were of the same general char- 
acter as those of Rosecrans in the Tulluhoma campaign 
in the summer of 1863. Leaving a small force, strongly 
intrenched in front of Johnston's army, he moved the 
bulk of his force by the flank, thus forcing the Confeder- 
ate commander to retire or to give battle under unfavor- 
able circumstances. During these frequent turning move- 
ments, it would seem that Johnston ought to have found 
an opportunity to deliver a crushing blow to one of the, 
at times, far separated Federal columns, or to have at- 



105 Hood, 208. 

106 Cox, Atlanta, 208-9 ; Sherman, 2 :108 ; Henry Stone, "The Atlanta Cam- 
paign," Papers of the Military Hiatorietd Society of Massachusetts, 8:476, 491. 



The Atlanta Campaign 109 

tacked them when at a disadvantage and in the act of 
making one of these flanking movements. But, instead, 
he only took up chosen positions and intrenched to meet 
the hoped-for attack, and at no time does he appear to 
have made a defensive use of the several rivers crossed 
in his retreat. ^''^ Both commanders appeared to be try- 
ing to carry on war with as little fighting as possible. At 
no time throughout the campaign was Sherman's entire 
army engaged in battle at one time. Most of the en- 
counters were essentially local engagements. It is, how- 
ever, interesting to note in this connection, that this 
condition was primarily the result of Sherman's strategy, 
and of his superiority in men and mobility, which aimed 
at flanking the Confederates out of successive positions, 
in many cases of great natural strength and made doubly 
strong by intrenchments and other obstacles, while at 
the same time carrying on the operations with as little 
loss as possible. Johnston's inferiority in numbers, and 
his plan to draw Sherman as far as possible from his base 
of supplies, made him unwilling to bring on a general 
engagement until convinced of his ability to deliver a 
crushing and decisive blow. 

The pursuit of Johnston has been characterized as 
"neither especially energetic nor skilful." Sherman, him- 
self, wrote Grant on July 12 that "my operations have 
been rather cautious than bold." An uninterrupted rain 
and the mountainous and wooded state of the country, 
together with the extreme heat, were in part responsible 
for this slowness of Sherman's progress. ^^* 

The Davis-Hood-Johnston controversy has already 
been touched on. Johnston, while dominating his envir- 
onment by ability and sheer force of character, did not 
readily invite friendships; he exacted deference and a 
recognition of his authority, and when these were with- 



107 Steele, 1 :548 and 652. 

108 Sherman to Grant. July 12, 1864, O. B. 88, part 6 :124 ; Ibid. :128. 



no Thomas R. Hay 

held, he was apt to become disputatious. He always 
seems to have been at cross-purposes with someone, and 
his Narrative is one long controversy, on the one hand, 
with Davis and the Richmond authorities, and, on the 
other, with subordinates who ventured to dispute the 
wisdom of his methods. 

The result of Johnston's operations caused great 
"popular disappointment", and pressure was brought on 
Davis to relieve him. Davis wrote that he was "averse 
to change commanders in the presence of the enemy," 
and only acted when he became convinced of Johnston's 
intention to leave the Georgia State troops as the sole 
guardian of Atlanta, while he withdrew "his army into 
the open for freer operations." Johnston, on the other 
hand, maintains that he fully intended to defend Atlanta 
to the last. General R. E. Lee believed it a mistake to 
make any change of commanders, and was "distressed" 
at the idea. He wrote that "if necessary it ought to be 
done," saying further: "I know nothing of the neces- 
sity." James A. Seddon, the Secretary of War, though he 
had urged Johnston as Bragg's successor, later came to 
favor his removal, and he only consulted Lee after it had 
been decided "to remove General Johnston from his com- 
mand," and then "merely to secure General Lee's estimate 
of qualifications in the selection of a successor for the 
command." General John B. Gordon thought only Lee 
could successfully replace Johnston, and General Richard 
Taylor, a brother-in-law of President Davis, character- 
ized Johnston's removal as a most "egregious blunder." ^^^ 

It is evident from all that General Hood wrote, in his 
reports and afterward in his book, Advance & Retreat, 
that he believed the Confederate army to have been great- 
ly disheartened by Johnston's continuous retreat, and, 



109 R & F, 2 : 556-57 ; Narrative, 363-64 ; Lee's Dispatches, 283 ; Hughea, 
261-52 ; J. B. Gordon, Reminiscences of the Civil War, 131-32 ; Richard Taylor, 
Destruction and Reconstruction, 44 and 130. 



The Atlanta Campaign 111 

later, as a result of the bloody fighting about Atlanta. ^^^ 
This attitude, at least until the end of the campaign, is 
not supported by the facts of the case. No army fought 
harder, and no army more loyally endeavored to carry 
out the plans and orders of its commander-in-chief, than 
did the Confederate Army of Tennessee. All evidence 
points to the cheerfulness and v^illingness of the rank 
and file in trying to carry out Johnston's plans to the 
letter, with implicit confidence in their wisdom and in 
the final result. ^^^ General Hood asserted that the army 
had become demoralized when he was appointed to com- 
mand it, and ascribes his invariable defeats partly to 
that cause. ^^^ This allegation is disproved, not only by 
the admirable and gallant conduct of the troops in the 
battles about Atlanta, but also by the written statements 
of Generals Hardee and A. P. Stewart. ^^^ It is naturally 
true that "troops who had, for two months, been hurled 
against breast-works only to be repulsed or to gain dear- 
bought and fruitless victories," should have moved 
against the enemy "with reluctance and distrust." At 
Jonesboro, S. D. Lee's attack was "not made by the troops 
with that spirit and inflexible determination that would 
insure success," and yet, on July 20, General Stewart 
speaks of "the brave officers and men whose blood was so 
freely and, it would seem, so uselessly shed." ^^^ The 
army finally became so depressed from the necessity for 
constantly assaulting the enemy in prepared positions, 
that Hood was "officially informed that there is a tacit, 
if not expressed, determination among the men of the 

army that they will not attack breastworks." ^^^ By 

the end of the campaign, depression reigned and dissent 
was rife among the general officers. Hood had lost pres- 

110 Hood, 134-35; Hood's Report, O R. 38, part 3:636. Cf. also footnote 
48, supra. 

111 Narrative, 351 ; Buck, 263 ; DuBose, 362. 

112 Hood, 183-87 and 195. 

113 Quoted in Narrative, 365-69. 

114 Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 3:702; Lee's Report, Ibid. :764 ; Stew- 
art's Report, Ibid. :872. 

115 Hood to Bragg, Sept. 4, 1864, O, B. 52, part 2 :730. 



112 Thomas R. Hay ^ - " 

tige by the costly failures of his campaign. Hardee was 
the principal offender. 

General Hood endeavors to place the responsibility 
for the failure of his army to achieve successes of any 
consequence on the 20th and 22nd of July, and for the 
failure to prevent Sherman from gaining possession of 
the railroad at Jonesboro, on General W. J. Hardee. We 
have already seen to what extent Hardee was responsible. 
As General E. P. Alexander has said: "... to trace it 
further would bring it home to (Hood) himself for fail- 
ure to supervise the execution of important orders . . ." "^^ 
Hood seems to have been marvelously lacking in definite 
information as to Sherman's plans and as to the position 
of his troops. His staff and intelligence services do not 
seem to have been of a high order. Had they been so, 
Hood's plans for the battle of July 20 would have made 
allowance for the possible need for Cheatham's exten- 
sion, to prevent being outflanked with the accompanying 
necessity for Hardee's closing up to prevent a gap between 
his right and Cheatham's left. The transfer of Cleburne's 
division, on orders from Hood himself, to assist Wheeler 
on the right of the line about Bald Hill, further compli- 
cated Hardee's situation, which had already become bad, 
by taking from him his largest division. Again, on July 
22, it is not conceivable that Hood could have been accu- 
rately informed as to the exact position of McPherson's 
troops and to the extent and the difficulties of the march 
required of Hardee's command. Had he been so in- 
formed, he would have known that it was physically im- 
possible for Hardee's tired troops to have marched out 
of Atlanta after midnight of the 21st and been in position 
to attack at dawn of the 22nd. To add to the difficulties 
imposed by the necessity of making a circuitous night 



116 Hood to Davis, Sept. 13, 1864, O. R. 39, part 2:832; Alexander, 577. 
The Hardee-Hood Controversy will be found fully discussed in Roy, S. H. S.. 
8 :337-87 ; Hood, 245, 250-51 and 254-55 ; O. B. 38, part 5 :987-88, 1016, 1018, 1021, 
1023, 1027, and 1030 and also in O. R. 39, part 2:832, 880-81 and O. R. 52, part 
2 :718 ; Buck, 249. 



The Atlanta Campaign 113 

march, the troops had been fighting and marching for 
two days, and their long march through thickly wooded 
and broken country, where it was often impossible to see 
ten paces ahead, and impeded by the passing of cavalry, 
was not calculated to find them "fresh troops" on the 
morrow of the battle. The "movement of blocks upon a 
map could hardly" have been "more accurate" than was 
the march of these troops, and the precision of Hardee's 
maneuvers was "marvelous." ^^^ 

Hood passes lightly over the battle of Ezra Church, 
as though it was a chance and unpremeditated engage- 
ment. ^^« For some reason, not explained, he dispatched 
Hardee to take command of Lee's and Stewart's corps. 
If he had lost confidence in Hardee and questioned his 
energy or his ability, why did he send him to take charge 
of troops, none of which were of his (Hardee's) com- 
mand? With more than one half the army engaged, it 
would seem that Hood himself should have gone to the 
scene. 

During the last week of the campaign, that is, after 
August 25, when Sherman began to move his army south 
to East Point and Jonesboro, Hood seems to have been 
completely in the dark as to Sherman's plans and inten- 
tions. He believed General Sherman to be retreating 
across the Chattahoochee River, because Wheeler had cut 
his communications with Chattanooga and Nashville. 
Hardee knew of Hood's obsession, and knew that Hood 
thought there was only a small Federal force in front 
of Jonesboro. ^^^ Knowing this, he called on Hood to come 
to that place, take command, and fight his own battle. 
Hood preferred to remain in Atlanta, although he could 
still have reached Jonesboro by railroad. It was not until 
August 30 that Hood was convinced that Sherman was 



117 Cox, Atlanta, 176. 

118 Hood, 194. 

119 DuBose, 390 ; Cox, Atlanta, 198 : Sherman, 2 :105 ; Hood's Report, O. B. 
38, part 3 :632 ; Hardee's Report, Ibid. :700. 



114 Thomas R. Hay 

moving against Jonesboro, and then he believed his ad- 
versary's force to consist of only two corps, whereas, six 
corps were available and within supporting distance of 
each other. ^^^ 

Hardee's delay in getting into position on August 31 
was due to the obstruction of the proposed line of march 
by Federal cavalry, this necessitating the finding of a new 
route and the consequent loss of time. Had Hood accu- 
rately divined Sherman's plans, he certainly would not 
have ordered Lee's corps, on the night of the 31st, to 
return in the direction of Atlanta. Apparently he still 
believed Sherman to be in force before Atlanta. Hood 
says that Hardee was to attack at dawn of the 31st, and 
drive the enemy (the greater portion of Sherman's 
army) before him. In the event of success, Lee's corps 
was to be withdrawn that night half way back to Atlanta, 
where he was to join the remainder of the army coming 
south from Atlanta. In the event of failure, Lee's corps 
was to be sent back, after dark, to protect the Confederate 
line of retreat. This statement (Hood's) of plans, is not 
substantiated by the facts, as Hood's order to Lee to 
withdraw the night of the 31st half way back to Atlanta, 
where he was to join the remainder of the army, was 
written and sent before the result of Hardee's operations 
at Jonesboro could have been known. ^*^ Here again we 
find Hardee dispatched to command at a critical point. 
Hood gives as his reason for this action that "the position 
of his (Hardee's) line of battle, together with that of 
General Lee, rendered it necessary" that he be sent, and 
that by virtue of seniority he assumed command. Dis- 
trust of Hardee, at the time, would seem to have dictated 
the withdrawal of Hardee's corps, rather than Lee's, on 
the night of the 31st. Hood characterizes the fight as a 



120 Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 3:700; Hood's Report, Ibid. :632-33 ; 
DuBose, 390 ; Sherman, 2 :107 ; Cox, Atlanta, 198flF j Howard, Autobiography. 2 :39. 

121 Hood's Report, O. R. 38, part 3:632; Hardee's Report, Ibid. :700 ; 
F. A. Shoup, Hood's Chief of Staff, to Hardee, 6 PM, Aug. 31, 1864, O. R. 38, 
part 5:1007-8; Hood. 205; Roy. S. H. S.. 8:372. 



The Atlanta Campaign 115 

"disgraceful effort." The principal attack, as we have 
seen, was made by Hood's own corps, then commanded by 
General Lee, and it was this attack which was repulsed 
and which General Lee, himself, spoke of as "a feeble one 
and a failure." Hood ascribes a large measure of respon- 
sibility for his failure to the reluctance of the troops to 
assault intrenched positions. ^*^ But as one writer has 
said : " . . the moment Hood took command perfect order 
gave way to general confusion; universal confidence, in 
the head of the army, was lost to suspicion, distrust, and 
resentment." ^** 

The argument of Hood's that Johnston's policy made 
the troops "timid" is not supported by the facts. If it 
were true. Hood's reversal of tactics should have inspired 
the troops with a buoyancy and confidence that would 
have made them irresistible. After his fights of July 20, 
22, and 28, it is reasonable to contend, in view of Hood's 
expressed plans, that more such bloody attacks would 
have been ordered, but by this time President Davis had 
had enough. On August 5 he wrote Hood : " . . . The loss 
consequent upon attacking him (Sherman) in his in- 
trenchments requires that you avoid that if practicable." 
Even Hood, himself, seems to have come to believe it more 
worth while to save his men. General Johnston could 
hardly have wished for a more specific vindication of his 
generalship. ^'* On September 4, at Love joy's Station, 
Hood wrote Bragg that he did "not think the army dis- 
couraged" as a result of its losses and defeats. If it was 
not pretty discouraged and broken in spirit, it was at 
least badly bent. ^*^ 

Fundamentally, General Hood's difficulties as com- 
mander of the army had their inception in his crippled 



122 Hood. 251 and 185-86; Hardee's Report, O. R. 38, part 3:702; Lee's 
Report, Ihid. :764 ; Lee's Report, O. R. 39, part 2:810; Hood to Bragg, Sept. 5, 
1864, O. B. 38, part 5:1021. 

123 DuBose. 371 ; Roy. S. H. S.. 8 :378-87. 

124 Davis to Hood, Aug. 5, 1864, O. R. 38, part 5 :946 ; Hood to Cheatham, 
Aug. 5, 1864, Ibid. 

125 Hood to Bragg, Sept. 4, 1864, O. B. 38, part 5:1018; Lee's Report, 
O. R. 89, part 2:810, 813. 



116 Thomas R. Hay 

physical condition. Because of his handicapping wounds, 
he did not have the personal mobility and activity that is 
one of the best assets of a commander in the field. 
Throughout the greater part of the campaign he directed 
operations from his headquarters in Atlanta. At critical 
times, instead of proceeding in person to the scene of 
action and superintending the execution of his orders, he 
sent a subordinate, usually General Hardee. Subordi- 
nates should have the ability and the authority to carry 
out the orders of the commanding chief, but in the dis- 
cretion necessarily attendant on such execution, local 
conditions and circumstances may often act to dictate 
actions that are at variance with the plans and intentions 
of the commander-in-chief, but which to the one on the 
ground might seem desirable. By being present on the 
field, or in close touch with the varying operations of the 
troops in the field, and by being present at critical points, 
the commander is able, not only to observe the progress 
of the battle, but also to make such general dispositions as 
will correlate the operations on the local field to the move- 
ments of the entire army. He will also be able to observe 
accurately the reason for the success or lack of success in 
the particular locality. Such occasions, in the Atlanta 
campaign, were the battles of July 20, 22, and 28, and 
also on August 31 and September 1. It is but just to 
General Hood to say that if such continued personal di- 
rection had been possible, the battles about Atlanta might 
have been more productive of positive results for the Con- 
federacy. Means of communication were often slow, and 
the staff organization does not seem to have functioned 
smoothly at all times, with the result that frequently Gen- 
eral Hood was not accurately informed of actual condi- 
tions or was informed too late for the information to be 
of any value. General Sherman, on the contrary, was 
everywhere, and was, as often as possible, in close touch 
with actual troop movements. ^^^ 

126 Sherman, 2:75, 82, 88, 104, 106-8. . . 



The Atlanta Campaign 117 

This poor physical condition of General Hood's is 
also reflected in his relations with his subordinates. His 
controversy with Hardee has been mentioned. Cheatham 
was not held in too high favor. General F. A. Shoup, his 
Chief of Staff, asked to be relieved. General A. P. Stew- 
art had been appointed to command a corps on Hood's 
recommendations, as had General S. D. Lee, but they were 
not always in essential or actual agreement. We see 
Bragg's difficulties as commander-in-chief repeated, and 
for the same reason. ^^"^ 

It is interesting to note the similarity of the cam- 
paigns of Lee in Virginia, against Grant, and that of 
Johnston in Georgia, against Sherman. Beginning in 
the same week, they were carried through, up to the 
time of Johnston's removal, in a very similar yet dissim- 
ilar fashion. Both Grant and Sherman forced their an- 
tagonists back toward the objective points of their re- 
spective campaigns by flanking movements. Both em- 
ployed cavalry with varying success. Grant attacked 
Lee in intrenchments. Except at New Hope Church and 
Kennesaw Mountain, Sherman evaded the proffered gage 
of battle, electing rather to continue his flanking move- 
ments. The first phase of the campaign, in each case, 
ended with the Confederate forces in position to bar the 
opponent's advance to his objective. In the one case. 
Grant recognized Lee's army as the primary objective, 
with the capture of Richmond as only a secondary object. 
Sherman, on the other hand, though taking Atlanta, not 
only failed to destroy Hood's power of offensive action, 
but risked the chances of his winning a decisive victory 
in the Federal rear, in order to make that spectacular raid 
known to history as the "march to the sea." 

But, in spite of Johnston's success in extricating his 
army from the various difficult situations in which Sher- 



127 Hood, 126 ; Hood to Seddon, July 19, 1864, O. R. 38, part 5 :892 ; Bragg 
to Davis, July 27, 1864, O. B. 52, part 2 :713 ; G. W. Smith in B «fe L, 4 ;335. 



118 Thomas R. Hay 

man's flank movements placed it, we do not find the fire 
and the readiness for battle that is evident in Lee's con- 
duct of the operations of the army opposing Grant. In 
fact, too often Johnston's leadership gives the negative 
impression of a passive defensive, whereas, in Virginia, 
Lee's leadership was essentially positive and aggressive, 
even though from defensive positions. 

The capture of Atlanta came just in time to secure 
the restoration of Lincoln and his party to power. On 
August 31, 1864, the Democratic convention adjourned at 
Chicago after proclaiming the war to be a failure. On 
that day it appeared that neither Grant nor Sherman had 
done anything to prove the declaration false. Both Fed- 
eral armies had suffered heavy losses, and all their re- 
spective commanders had to show for them were a few 
square miles of territory, that were being completely 
over-run by daring enemy cavalry raiders, and long cas- 
ualty lists. Lee's and Johnston's armies were in the field 
and capable of great harm. Richmond and Atlanta were 
still in the hands of the Confederacy. Just in time came 
the sunburst. Hood evacuated Atlanta, and the 20th 
corps of Sherman's army marched in and took possession. 
Sherman telegraphed President Lincoln : "Atlanta is ours 
and fairly won." 



GEORGIA'S DEBT TO MONMOUTH COUNTY, 
NEW JERSEY 

By William W. Gordon 

George Whitefield's Journal, under date Monday, 
May 5, 1740, states: "My dear Brother and Fellow- 
Labourer Mr. William Tennant coming to fetch me, I 
passed over a Ferry with him and his Brother Gilbert, 
who also came to Amboy to meet me. With them I set 
out for Freehold, twenty Miles from Amboy, the Place 
where God has more immediately called Mr. William Ten- 
nant Tuesday, May 6. Preached at Freehold 

in the Morning to about 3000." ^ 

Rev. George Whitefield, it will be recalled, was a 
priest of the Anglican church and was later the founder 
of the "Calvanistic" Methodists, ^ as John Wesley, his 
friend and co-laborer in Georgia, was the founder of the 
Methodist Episcopal church. 

Supplementing the above extract, but with a date 
which should be May 6 instead of May 13, we quote the 
following : 

"The American Weekly Mercury, April 24th — May 
1st, 1740, announced the preaching place of Rev. Mr. 
Whitefield for the week and shows that on Tuesday morn- 
ing at ten o'clock. May 13th, 1740, he was to preach at 
Mr. William Tennant's new meeting house at Freehold, 
where a collection is to be made for the Orphan House 
in Georgia. This was the first house on White Hill. Also 
it is a well authenticated tradition that Whitefield once 
preached in the present Old Tennent pulpit on Acts 26; 
18." * 



1 A Continuation of the Reverend Mr. White fidd's Journal, London, 1741, 
p. 34. 

2 McCall, History of Georgia, I, 159. 

3 Symmes, History of the Old Tennent Church, 2nd Ed., p. 86. 




statue:of whitefield 

On the Campus of the University of Pennsylvania 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 



121 



That Whitefield should be traveling and preaching 
and soliciting aid in New Jersey for his orphan house is 
not singular, for it had been his practice in England to 
travel and preach extensively and solicit alms for charity, 
and he states on June 10, 1738, in a letter from Savannah : 
"What I have most at heart, is the building an orphan- 
house, which I trust will be effected at my return to 
England.'* ^ 

But there is a deeper interest in the thought that 
the descendants of a number of Monmouth County people 




OLD TENNENT CHURCH 

who listened to Whitefield and formed a part of these 
congregations, afterward migrated to Georgia; that a 
number of them probably participated in the Battle of 
Monmouth which took place on the farm where this 
church is located and where Whitefield preached, and that 
the church itself, the Old Tennent Church, is still stand- 
ing, some three miles west or southwest of Freehold, Mon- 
mouth County, N, J. 

A large part of this farm was originally granted in 
1688 to Rev. George Keith, a stormy character who was 

4 Whitefield, A Select Collection of Letters, London, 1772, I, 44. 



122 William W. Gordon 

born a Presbyterian, then became a Quaker, then formed 
a band of dissenting Quakers, called "Keithians," and 
ended as a member of the Church of England. 

Whitefield was not a man of pronounced mentality 
nor of unusual learning ; but he possessed extraordinary 
oratorical powers, and his ability as a preacher to attract 
enormous audiences, and convert them to his views and 
sway them to his purposes, has never been excelled. His 
heart was large, his charity infinite, and the Bethesda 
Orphanage, the first of its kind in America, still exists 
near Savannah as a monument to his heroic labors. 

Keith was the antithesis of Whitefield. A man of 
brilliant intellect, with all the polish and refinement that 
study could bestow upon a university graduate, his mind 
dominated his heart and he wasted his powers in polemic 
discussions. A good man and an honest laborer in God's 
vineyard, in the three states of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, 
and New York, he left nothing to commemorate his good 
deeds. 

Now when we contemplate George Whitefield follow- 
ing in the steps of George Keith and preaching in the 
same territory, it is interesting to note a further differ- 
ence in the two characters. 

George Whitefield declined to be held down to any 
church or to any sect. He said of himself: "I care not 
for any Sect or Party of Men. As I love all that love the 
Lord Jesus, of what Communion soever; so Fll reprove 
all, whether Dissenters, or not Dissenters, who take his 
Word into their Mouths, but never felt him dwelling in 
their Hearts." ^ 

January 24, 1740, he writes from Savannah to a 
clergyman : "It pleased me to find you breathe so catholic 
a spirit. — that bigotry and party zeal were not so much 
as once named amongst us." He was, in fact, so unortho- 



5 A Continuation of the Reverend Mr. Whitefield'a Journal, p. 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 123 

dox that many ministers in Charleston, New York, and 
elsewhere, refused him the use of their churches. But 
this did not deter Whitefield from his broad and noble 
efforts in behalf of the poor and distressed. He writes 
from Boston, September 26, 1740 : "Almost all the min- 
isters, and vast bodies of people, have been continually- 
pressing to hear the word of God, sometimes in the fields, 
and sometimes in the meeting houses." 

He was often solicited to confine his preaching to a 
particular church or sect, but in each instance he declined, 
and he continued to preach without reserve to Presbyte- 
rians, Quakers, and Episcopalians, inside and outside the 
places of worship ; and to such eif ect in New York, New 
Jersey, and Pennsylvania, that he received nearly 500 
pounds for the orphan house in Georgia. 

How much more narrow was Rev. Mr. Keith, who 
was nothing if not orthodox. Keith came to East Jersey 
in 1684, and later resided in Freehold, of which settlement 
he was the founder and where, at the time of his removal 
in 1689 to Pennsylvania, he had a fine plantation. ^ "Free- 
hold was settled by emigrants from Scotland. One-half 
of the people were Scotch Presbyterians." '' 

Keith is described by Bishop Gilbert Burnet as "the 
most learned man that ever was in that sect, and well 
versed in the Oriental tongues, philosophy and mathe- 
matics." * He possessed great natural talents, improved 
by study. He was acute in argument, ready and able in 
logical discussions, and capable of making fine distinc- 
tions in theological matters. ^ He was intolerant of all 
who differed from him, and was continually in hot water 
with his co-religionists as well as with outsiders. These 
differences qualified him, perhaps, when he thought he 



6 Whitehead, Contributions to East Jersey History, p. 17. 

7 Salter, History of Monmouth and Ocean Counties, p. 123. 

8 Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th ed., XV, 716. 

9 Whitehead, Contributions to East Jersey History, p. 18. 



124 William W. Gordon 

had reached a safe resting place, to write the hymn some- 
times ascribed to him : 

"How firm a foundation, ye Saints of the Lord, 

Is laid for your faith in his excellent Word." 

In the light of the foregoing, there is special interest 
attaching to four of the charter members of our Georgia 
Historical Society, which was organized June 4, 1839, in 
that Rev. A. B. Longstreet, Major John LeConte, Hon. 
John McPherson Berrien, the first President, and Hon. 
W. W. Gordon, all had their origin in Monmouth County, 
and their people resided in the vicinity of this same old 
Tennent Church where George Whitefield preached and 
where the Battle of Monmouth was fought. This church 
was organized by Scotch Presbyterians who settled in 
Freehold, N. J., and was located on the Monmouth Battle 
Ground Farm. 

Rev. A. B. Longstreet, the well-known author of 
Georgia Scenes, and one of our charter members, was a 
descendant of Christopher Longstreet, who in turn was 
the son of Theophilus and his wife, Mercy Lane. 

Christopher Longstreet was one of the first Trustees 
under the charter of the Tennent Church, and was bap- 
tized in the Dutch Reformed Church of Long Island, De- 
cember 25, 1713, and married Abigail Wooley December, 
1743. He died in 1784. One of his descendants was the 
famous Confederate general, James Longstreet, son of 
Rev. A. B. Longstreet; and another was Virginia Lafay- 
ette Longstreet, who married Hon. Lucius Q. C. Lamar of 
the United States Supreme Court, many of whose rela- 
tives reside in this state. 

No family stands higher in the intellectual world of 
America than the Le Contes. So much so that whenever 
we meet the Le Conte strain, we find a brilliant mind with 
distinct scientific attainments. The brothers, John and 
Joseph Le Conte, are perhaps the best known, but there 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 125 

was Dr. John I. Le Conte, born in Shrewsbury, 1784, the 
noted naturalist, as well as Dr. John Eatton Le Conte, the 
charter member of our Society mentioned above, who 
was an authority on butterflies, besides many others of 
superlative ability. Hon. John McPherson Berrien, the 
first president of our Society, was a first cousin of the 
Le Contes, through his mother, Margaret Eatton. He was 
Attorney-General in President Jackson's Cabinet, and 
United States Senator from Georgia. 

How the Le Contes drifted from Monmouth County, 
N. J., to Georgia, may be seen from a narrative given by 
a member of the family. 

Peter Le Conte, christened Pierre, but who anglicised 
his name, was a practicing physician and a citizen of 
Monmouth County, N. J. His wife was Valeria, a 
daughter of John Eatton of Eattontown, that state. Mrs. 
Le Conte had a brother, Thomas Eatton, who was a mer- 
chant in New York City. 

In 1760, Thomas Eatton appeared in person before 
the Provincial Council of Georgia, setting forth that he 
was a citizen of the colony, that he expected to bring a 
number of relatives and friends "from the northward" to 
settle here, and prayed a reservation of a quantity of 
pine land in St. Philip's Parish, and a site adjoining upon 
Canouchee River suitable for a sawmill. The reservation 
was granted, and the following year he appeared and took 
up these lands, and with him were his nephews, William 
and John Eatton Le Conte. Thomas Eatton was a mer- 
chant in Savannah, and the sawmill interests seem to have 
been looked after by his nephews. Later he purchased 
the sloop, "Charming Kittie," from Ralston and Nesbitt, 
and she was kept in service between Canouchee and Sa- 
vannah and in trade with Havana. He died in 1768, 
naming as his executors, "William Le Conte, Gentleman, 
and John Eatton Le Conte, Doctor of Physic." During 
this interval and afterward, the brothers took up many 



126 William W. Gordon 

tracts of land in St. Philip's and St. John's Parish. Wil- 
liam lived most of the time in Savannah and had property- 
there, one piece of which was a wharf lot No. 4. ^^ 

Another sister of Thomas Eatton, Margaret, had 
married in New Jersey, John Berrien, and in 1775 their 
son, John, came to Georgia to join his cousins. At the 
age of fifteen he was appointed Captain in the Georgia 
Line, Continental Establishment, and there was warm at- 
tachment existing between him and his superior. General 
Lachlan Mcintosh. When Washington transferred Mcin- 
tosh to the Northern army, to remove him from the center 
of bitter factionalism following his duel with Gwinnett, 
he requested that Berrien be transferred with him. Mc- 
intosh was placed in command of the North Carolina 
Brigade, and, with Berrien acting as Brigade Major, was 
in charge of that command during the bitter winter of 

1778 at Valley Forge. After the Revolution Berrien made 
application to the War Department to be rated as a Major, 
but owing, no doubt, to the opposition of the Gwinnett 
faction, he was only confirmed in his original rank of 
Captain. 

The Le Conte brothers were both recognized patriots, 
but their actual service has not been established. In 

1779 or 1780 William, with several other prominent 
Georgia and Savannah people, was living in Camden, S. C. 
The diary of a Massachusetts captain, serving with the 
Southern Army of Light-Horse Harry Lee, and published 
in Massachusetts, has an entry something like this: — 
"Christmas Day, lay in Camden all day. The officers of 
the Regiment supped and drank wine with Mr. Le Conte. 
This town much ruined by the British." The stub entry 
records of South Carolina show payments to William 
Le Conte and other Savannah men for work done by their 
slaves on the fortifications around Camden. Two younger 
Le Conte brothers, Thomas and Peter, died unmarried in 



10 John Eaton, City Lot 4, 1761. Hughes Copy McKinnon's Map. 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 127 

Georgia during the Revolution, the latter in 1776. It is 
evident that at that time neither William nor John Eatton 
Le Conte was in Georgia, as the estate of Peter, who died 
in Savannah, was administered by one Bourquin. John 
Eatton Le Conte had gone north in 1775 and, owing to the 
illness of Dr. Zubly, who was to have carried them, he 
took to Boston the contribution of rice and money made 
by the people of St. John's Parish to the evicted sufferers 
at Boston. He married in New York City the following 
year and seems thereafter to have made his home in that 
city. After the Revolution William Le Conte married 
Elizabeth Lawrence and died in Savannah in 1788, 
leaving no children. 

The sons of John Eatton Le Conte were William, 
Louis (or Lewis), and John Eatton, in the order named. 
William died in Georgia unmarried, Louis Le Conte was 
the great-grandfather of J. A. Le Conte and was the 
father of William, Louis, John and Joseph (the scien- 
tists), Mrs. J. M. B. Harden, and Mrs. J. P. Stevens. At 
the death of their father in 1820 or 1821, the two brothers 
divided the property, John Eatton, or "Uncle Jack," as 
the family have always known him, taking the Northern 
property, and Louis the Georgia property. John Eatton 
was usually spoken of as Major or Major Jack Le Conte, 
having served for some years as a Major of Engineers in 
the United States army. He was especially interested in 
natural history, and was the recognized American author- 
ity on American butterflies. In collaboration with a 
French scientist he put out a work on this subject which 
is still considered a standard authority. 

Major Le Conte married Isabella Rose and left one 
son, Dr. John Lawrence Le Conte. Dr. J. L. Le Conte is 
best known by his investigations and writings on the 
American coleoptera (beetles), and is said to be the 
highest authority on that subject. When J. A. Le Conte's 
father was a boy in Liberty County "Cousin John L." 



128 



William W. Gordon 



used to visit his Georgia kin nearly every winter, and his 
father was usually with him; and he used to tell of the 
training "Uncle Jack" would give him and his brother 
in the proper method of killing birds and reptiles with 
bows and specially made arrows, and in preserving their 
skins until his return. ^^ 

The fourth charter member whose forebears came 
from Monmouth County was W. W. Gordon. He was 



.'iSCo 



<.y 



.>*■»..' 'O-" 



'T-'/; 



y<jC; 






PUtttJ hem D*tt 
Cenlotned in tttt ■ 

ieale 5 Chi 



MB Th* ihodtd porttett 
rtprttBKii VA. fcrmt'r hcUitu^ 



BATTLE GROUND FARM 

born in Screven County, his father being Colonel Ambrose 
Gordon of Monmouth County, N. J., who served under 
Lieutenant-Colonel William Washington during the Rev- 
olutionary War, and when that officer was captured at 
Eutaw Springs, the then Lieutenant Gordon was com- 
mended by Light-Horse Harry Lee for his success in 
drawing off the residue of the command. ^* 



Letter J. A. Le Conte to William Harden, February 12, 1923, 
Lee> Memoirs, p. 886. 



^- 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 129 

Ambrose Gordon, after the Revolution, moved to 
Georgia and lived in Savannah, where he served as United 
States Marshal, and later moved to Augusta, Ga., where 
his grave may be found in St. PauFs Churchyard. An- 
other ancestor of W. W. Gordon was Robert Rhea, who 
bought the Battle Ground Farm in 1688. Robert Rhea's 
daughter married Peter Gordon, whose plantation was 
near Imlaystown, N. J., and who built the house which is 
still standing and which, with the chestnut posts imported 
from England and other unusual accessories, was regard- 
ed as a pretentious mansion in its time. 

Peter Gordon, in 1715, bought this plantation from 
John Saltar who, in a letter in 1716 to Obadiah Bowne, 
speaks of "My brother Lincon," and presently it will be 
seen that John Saltar and Mordecai Lincoln were broth- 
ers-in-law. 

One of the neighbors of Peter Gordon was Mordecai 
Lincoln's brother, Abraham Lincoln, whose blacksmith 
shop was on the Lincoln farm adjoining the Gordon plan- 
tation. These places were in the Crosswicks, N. J., section. 

When Peter Gordon died his estate was appraised by 
Robert Lawrence, ancestor of Captain James Lawrence, 
famous for his dying command, "Don't give up the ship." 
Another appraiser was "Cornelius Van Horen," known 
as Captain Cornelius Van Home, who as a second wife 
married Elizabeth Lawrence, and who was, perhaps, a 
brother-in-law of Robert Lawrence. The third appraiser 
was "Abraham Lincoln," whose name was found by the 
author of this article on the original appraisement in 
Trenton, N. J., subscribed in exceptionally beautiful 
script, thus: Abraham Lincon. ^« This was in the year 
1725, nearly a hundred years before the future President 
was born. This Abraham Lincoln owned 240 acres of land 
situated near Croswicks, Monmouth County, which he 



13 Trenton Records, Liber B-2- page 310, Vol. 1, Monmouth Co. Wills, 
Manuscript No. 283. 



130 William W. Gordon 

sold in 1737. His brother, Mordecai Lincoln ("Mordiac 
Linkhorn"), had lands which, in 1786, were given as the 
boundary of the lands of Ezekiel Gordon, brother of Am- 
brose Gordon, which belonged to their father, Jonathan 
Rhea Gordon, and which were close to the Battle Ground 
Farm. Another neighbor was William Estill. 

Mordecai Lincoln married Hannah, daughter of 
Richard and Sarah Bowne Salter, and Sarah was a grand- 
daughter of a Captain John Bowne of the Croswicks 
neighborhood. And, it should be noted, the name Bowne 
was corrupted into Boone, for Mordecai Lincoln named as 
a trustee in his will, George Boone, who was grandfather 
of the celebrated Daniel Boone. ^* 

Mordecai Lincoln moved from Monmouth County to 
Chester County, Pa., where he died in the year 1737. He 
had been in the iron business, and owned a thousand acres 
of land in Pennsylvania besides lands in New Jersey, and 
was a man of wealth and standing in the communities in 
which he resided. His son, John, emigrated to Augusta 
County, Va., and his son, Abraham, went to North Caro- 
lina and later moved to Kentucky. Abraham's son, 
Thomas Lincoln, was the father of President Abraham 
Lincoln. ^^ 

From the foregoing it will appear that Abraham Lin- 
coln and Daniel Boone had a common ancestor. Captain 
John Bowne, and that the Lincoln family in the Mon- 
mouth County days was of sterling yeoman stock. 

But to return to the Battle Ground Farm. This 
property, after Robert Rhea, was owned by several mem- 
bers of the family and then it came into the possession of 
Ezekiel Gordon, who owned it up to the time of his death 
in 1832. 

On October 8, 1803, the records of the Old Tennent 
Church show that William Washington, son of Ambrose 



14 Salter, History of Monmouth and Oceo^n Counties, p. XXXVIII. 

15 Morse, Abraham Lincoln, 1, 4-5. 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 131 

Gordon, was baptized. He was presented by his uncle, 
Ezekiel Gordon. The tradition in the family is that as 
a boy he frequently visited the Battle Ground Farm, and 
when he did not rise with sufficient celerity of a winter's 
morning, his uncle had the pleasant practice of throwing 
him out into the snow as an eye-opener. 

To those who are studying the Bounty question, it 
may be of interest to know that the State of Georgia made 
five classes of grants for Revolutionary service, as 
follows : 

First, Those who remained in Georgia during the 
Revolutionary War and served in the militia when called 
for, were granted 250 acres each. There were 2,923 per- 
sons who received grants under this head. 

Second, Refugees who fled the state but fought in 
the American army. There were 694 of this class re- 
ceiving land grants. 

Third, Those who were not in active service, but 
were enrolled as minute men. Of this class 555 received 
grants. 

Fourth, Citizens of other states who came to the help 
of Georgia as Continental soldiers. Two hundred grants 
were made of this character. 

Fifth, Those who served in the navy. Only 9 land 
warrants were issued to persons of this class. ^^ 

Ambrose Gordon received several grants on account 
of military service, as did likewise General Anthony 
Wayne, whose will, filed at Savannah, Ga., uses this 
language : 

"I give and bequeath to my son, Isaac Wayne, his 
heirs and assigns, the 1500 acres of donation lands grant- 
ed by the Congress of the United States of America as 
some retribution for the loss of blood I sustained in the 



16 Letter of Hon. S. G. McLendon, Secretary of State, January 22, 1923. 



132 William W. Gordon 

defense of the liberties of America in many a well-fought 
field from the frozen lakes of Canada to the burning sands 
of Florida." 

General Wayne also owned 1500 acres of land on the 
Little Satilla River in Camden County, Ga. 

As is well known, General Nathaniel Greene received 
grants of land, and lived and died at Mulberry Grove 
Plantation, ten miles west of Savannah on the Savannah 
River. 

It may also be noted that on May 12, 1791, President 
Washington visited Savannah, and March 9, 1825, Gen- 
eral Lafayette visited Savannah and laid the cornerstone 
for the monuments to General Greene and Count Pulaski. 

At the council of war, preceding the Battle of Mon- 
mouth, we recall with pride that Generals Washington, 
Greene, Wayne, and Lafayette, were the only officers, save 
one, who voted to fight, and it was their skill and valor 
which crowned the American arms with victory. 

Looking backward again for a moment, a British 
publication during the Revolution used this language: 
"By very recent accounts from New Jersey, we are in- 
formed Mr. Washington is still in his old quarters at 

West Point Mr. Wayne is still at Paramus; and 

Mr. Baylor's Light Horse at Peckman's River, back of 
Aqua Chinunk." ^"^ This, it will be seen, is shortly after 
the Battle of Monmouth, and it is amusing to note that 
the -Revolutionary officers, being rebels in the eyes of the 
British, were not even accorded the dignity of a military 
title. 

The Mr. Baylor mentioned above was Colonel Baylor, 
who was afterward surprised and wounded, and his com- 
mand was taken over by Lieutenant-Colonel William 
Washington, who served later with distinction under Gen- 
eral Greene in the Southern campaign. 



17 The Royal Gazette, No. 325, November 10, 1779. 
New Jersey Archives, 2nd. Series, Vol. 24, page 19. 



Georgia's Debt to Monmouth County 133 

Washington's Jersey campaign, which cleared New 
Jersey of the British, is worthy of being traced. 

Sir Henry Clinton, with his army of about ten thou- 
sand men, moved out of Philadelphia in the direction of 
New York. Washington was eager to attack him but 
many of his officers opposed this plan. General 
Charles Lee, amongst others, said : "If Sir Henry Clinton 
wants to go to New York we should make a golden bridge 
for him to travel over." Washington called a council of 
war and every officer opposed fighting except General 
Cadwalader and Generals Greene, Wayne, and Lafayette. 

Washington determined to fight and attack at the 
most favorable moment. Sir Henry Clinton proceeded as 
far as Allentown with a view to going to Brunswick, but 
finding Washington in his path, he diverged to the south- 
ward, traveling past Croswicks and towards Middletown, 
N. J., near the Atlantic Highlands. ^^ He spent the night 
of June 27, 1778, on the Heights near Freehold, and the 
next morning he was attacked by the American forces and 
the battle began. General Lee had first relinquished his 
command and General Lafayette had replaced him; but 
later, regretting his action, he had asked for his command, 
which was restored to him by General Washington. 

Hardly had the battle begun 'when Lee's forces were 
sent reeling back, to the surprise and chagrin of General 
Washington, who vented his anger in no uncertain terms 
upon General Lee when he appeared on the scene. Gen- 
eral Washington, from a position under the shadow of 
the Old Tennent Church, rallied his troops and the battle, 
commencing with such disorder, ended with a victory for 
the American troops, the first real victory, perhaps, 
achieved by the Americans in the Revolutionary War. 
Washington was prepared to renew the attack the next 
day, but the British retreated and made their way to 
Middletown, N. J., and thence to New York, leaving on 



18 Salter, History, p. 152, quoting Thomas F. Gordon's History of New 
Jersey. 



134 William W. Gordon 

the field of battle Colonel Monckton, who was later buried 
in the Old Tennent Church Cemetery, besides other dead 
and wounded. 

Irving's Life of Washington gives a spirited account 
of the battle, and the map not only shows the Battle 
Ground Farm and the line of Lee's retreat, but it also 
shows the Old Tennent Church and Lafayette, Greene, and 
Sterling holding their ground, with the Church at their 
back, preparatory to throwing back the British. ^^ 

The Church has thus borne its part in national as 
well as local history, and besides the names mentioned 
above, we find amongst its records such familiar Georgia 
names as John Crawford (said to be the ancestor of Hon. 
William Harris Crawford of Georgia), James Dillon, 
James Dorsett, Rowland Ellis, Daniel Estell, General 
David Foreman (ancestor of the Bryans and Screvens), 
William Goulding, John Newell, Daniel Seabrook, Jere- 
miah Stillwell, Nathaniel A. Pratt, Hopewell Hull, John 
Inman. ^^ 

What influenced this migration is, of course, a mat- 
ter of pure conjecture, but when we consider that almost, 
if not all, of the above were connected with, or at least 
lived in the vicinity of the Old Tennent Church where 
George Whitefield preached more than once; that about 
the year 1773 Rev. William Tennent preached in the old 
Midway Church in Liberty County, Ga. ; ^^ it is fair to con- 
clude that his contact with New Jersey people was not 
without influence, and that Georgia has been enriched in 
more ways than one by the preaching and example of 
George Whitefield. 



19 Irving, Lije of Washington, III, 429. 

20 Salter, History of Monmouth and Ocean Counties, appendix. 

21 Stacy, History of Midway Church, p. 43. 



CRAWFORD WILLIAMSON LONG AND THE 
DISCOVERY OF ANESTHESIA 

By Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

ATLANTA, GA. 

To Crawford Williamson Long, of Georgia, rightfully 
belongs the credit of the discovery of anesthesia. The 
benefits derived by the human race from this achievement 
place it among the greatest discoveries of all ages. Long's 
gift to the world, in 1842, and the contribution of Lord 
Lister in 1867, of antiseptic surgery, are the two greatest 
events in the history of medicine. Before this time sur- 
gery had made but little advance. On account of the pain 
and infection incident to surgical operations, only a com- 
paratively few operations were ever attempted, and these 
with poor success. Since the universal employment of 
the discoveries of Long and Lister, the whole science of 
medicine has become revolutionized, with the result of 
untold blessings to millions of people. 

Of the two epoch-making discoveries. Long's must be 
considered the greatest. Without his work, the practical 
application of antiseptic surgery would have been limited 
to the narrow sphere of minor surgery. The first neces- 
sity of most operations is to be able to perform them 
without pain to the patient, and usually without con- 
sciousness. While other methods of producing insensi- 
bility to pain have come into vogue today, besides the sim- 
ple and effective one introduced by Dr. Long, it is still 
true that Crawford Long was the first anesthetist, and the 
majority of the anesthetics which have been administered 
since his time have been by his method. 

Two other Southerners whose services to medical sci- 
ence entitle them to everlasting praise are Ephraim Mc- 
Dowell, of Kentucky, and J. Marion Sims, of Alabama. 




-:■/■ -'V^'''^ :--i 'SM^^^^^m^^W^S--' 4 



DR. CRAWFORD W. LONG 
Reprinted by courtesy of Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin 



Crawford Williamson Long 137 

The former, called the "Father of Ovariotomy," was the 
founder of abdominal surgery (1809), while the latter 
was the first to invent instruments and methods for the 
relief of women injured in child-birth (1849). It is in- 
teresting to observe that the work of Long, McDowell, and 
Sims was accomplished remote from the so-called high- 
roads of civilization, showing that genius does not always 
require elaborate material equipment for the creation of 
great ideas. 

Most of the facts of Long's life, and the events re- 
lating to his use of ether, are well-known, and are sub- 
stantiated by numerous affidavits, the originals of which 
are now in the possession of his two surviving daughters, 
Mrs. Frances Long Taylor and Miss Emma Long, of 
Athens. A list of the leading papers which have ap- 
peared on the subject, and which include reproductions 
of all the important certificates, is appended at the end 
of the present article. 

The truth concerning a matter of such moment as 
the discovery of anesthesia should be as well-known by 
the laity, particularly Georgians, as by the medical pro- 
fession. Twenty years ago the Legislature of Georgia 
voted to place Crawford Long's statue in the National 
Hall of Fame as the discoverer of anesthesia. Three 
years ago the electors of the Hall of Fame of the Uni- 
versity of New York conferred the honor on William 
Thomas Green Morton, of Massachusetts. In the Public 
Gardens in Boston there stands a monument to the dis- 
covery of anesthesia on which no man's name appears. 
Thus is the opinion of the world divided. 

Crawford W. Long was born in Danielsville, Madi- 
son County, CJa., November 1, 1815. His grandfather 
was Captain Samuel Long, an Irishman by birth, who 
emigrated to Pennsylvania in 1762, and settled in Car- 
lisle. He married Miss Williamson of Ulster, Ireland; 



138 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

served in the army of Washington, and at the Yorktown 
surrender was a captain in the command of the Marquis 
de Lafayette. After the war, in 1792, James Long moved 
to Madison County, Ga., taking with him his eleven-year- 
old son James, who had been born in Carlisle. This 
James Long, father of Crawford, married Elizabeth 
Ware, a Virginia girl, whose parents were born and 
reared in Albemarle County, Va., and had come to Geor- 
gia and settled in Madison County. She was an energet- 
ic, warm-hearted, ambitious woman, of refined taste and 
much literary ability. Crawford Long's father was a 
planter, and for years was Clerk of the Supreme Court. 
He sat in the State Senate for two terms and was the 
intimate and trusted friend of the Georgia statesman, 
William H. Crawford, who was successively United 
States Senator, Minister to France, Secretary of the 
Treasury, and candidate for President of the United 
States, in 1824, against John Quincy Adams, Andrew 
Jackson, and Henry Clay. Dr. Long was named after 
William H. Crawford and Captain Samuel Long's wife. 

Crawford attended the Academy in his native town, 
and at the age of fourteen entered Franklin College, now 
the University of Georgia, where he took the degree of 
Master of Arts, in 1835, at the age of 19, being considered 
"studious and wise" beyond his years, and called "The 
Baby" at college on account of his youth. He stood sec- 
ond in the graduating class. Contemporaneous with him 
were General Howell Cobb, General Benning, of Colum- 
bus, and Senator Herschel V. Johnson, of the class of 
1834; General Francis Bartow of Savannah, who was 
killed at the first battle of Manassas, of the class of 1835 ; 
and Senator A. 0. Bacon, of the class of 1836. His room- 
mate and closest friend, however, was Alexander H. Ste- 
phens, of the class of 1832. It is remarkable that two col- 
lege roommates should have been chosen as the only two 



Crawford Williamson Long 139 

citizens to represent Georgia in the National Hall of 
Fame. Undoubtedly the embryo physician must have re- 
ceived inspiration for his future greatness by his associa- 
tion with such men as these, as they must have felt the 
stimulation of contact with him. 

Long taught for one year in the Danielsville Acad- 
emy, and after that began the study of medicine at Jef- 
ferson, Ga., under Dr. Grant. He then took a medical 
course of one year, at Lexington, Ky. In 1837 he entered 
the medical department of the University of Pennsylva- 
nia, which was then, as today, one of the leading medical 
schools of the world. Receiving his degree of M. D. 
here in 1839, he next went to New York, where he spent 
eighteen months "walking the hospitals" and working 
with the leading medical teachers. He specialized in sur- 
gery, and saw much suffering result therefrom. 

In 1841, when 26 years of age, Dr. Long settled in 
the little town of Jefferson, Jackson County, Ga., buying 
out the practice of his old preceptor, Dr. Grant. He 
soon acquired a lucrative practice, which grew rapidly 
and extended into the neighboring counties and towns of 
Georgia. His house in the village became the favorite 
social resort for the young men of the vicinity, and it 
was here that the great discovery was made, March 30, 
1842. 

On August 11, 1842, Dr. Long married Mary Caro- 
line Swain, the sixteen-year-old daughter of a planter, 
George Swain, the niece of Governor Swain, of North 
Carolina, who was afterward president of the University 
of North Carolina, a lovely and intellectual woman, fit 
in every way to be the life partner of such a man. Mrs. 
Long died September 22, 1888, at Comfort, Tex., from in- 
juries received in a railroad wreck. She lies buried with 
her husband in Oconee cemetery at Athens. Twelve chil- 



140 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

dren were born to this marriage, of whom two survive 
today, Mrs. Frances Long Taylor and Miss Emma Long. 

It is interesting to note that for one year, in 1850- 
51, Dr. Long lived in Atlanta, but he found it such a 
crude village and with so little promise that he moved 
back to the classic city of Athens, where there were bet- 
ter advantages for educating his children. He continued 
to reside in Athens until the day of his death, June 16, 
1876, after practicing medicine for nearly forty years. 

Even without the discovery of anesthesia, Dr. Long 
would be considered one of Georgia's most distinguished 
physicians. At the unveiling of the monument to his 
memory in 1912, in Jefferson, Dr. Woods Hutchinson said 
that Long was in many respects in advance of his day. 
He treated and cured consumption by food and fresh air, 
and he treated typhoid fever practically as we do now. 
He operated several times very successfully for cancer 
of the breast, always clearing the ribs and removing the 
axillary glands. He cured several cases of lockjaw, and 
was especially skilled in the use of obstetrical forceps. 

Long was reared a Presbyterian, his father and pa- 
ternal grandfather having been elders in the Presbyte- 
rian church, but he joined the Methodist church in order 
to be with his wife. He considered slavery as God's 
method of civilizing the African, and felt deeply the re- 
sponsibility of having slaves to control and influence. 
Politically he was a Whig, and with his friend, Alexander 
H. Stephens, he opposed secession, but like many other 
patriots, he "went with his state." 

During the civil war he was never in active service, 
but was appointed by the Confederate government in 
charge of the military hospital on the University campus 
at Athens. The Southern Cross of Honor was conferred 
upon him in 1912, by the United Daughters of the Con- 
federacy. 



Crawford Williamson Long 141 

All who knew him unite in declaring him a man of 
exceptional qualities of mind and soul. Dignified in man- 
ner, his whole appearance betokened culture and high 
character. It is said that he possessed no eccentricities, 
very unusual in a celebrity. He was sensitive, refined, 
and considerate of others; free from envy, malice, and 
uncharitableness. He maintained a slight reserve, except 
among intimates and congenial people. Cheerful in the 
sick room, he inspired his patients with confidence. He 
was fond of Shakespeare and good music; tall and slen- 
der, dressed in conventional black, always with frock 
coat; in short, a high-bred, scholarly. Christian gentle- 
man. 

One writer has claimed that Long "stumbled" upon 
his discovery; that it was the merest accident. Even 
if this were true, it would not detract from the credit 
which is due him. But it is not true. Long made the 
discovery of surgical anesthesia because he was looking 
for it, and because he was a keen observer and a coura- 
geous man. His experience in the New York hospitals, 
where he had witnessed the pain of women in child-birth, 
convinced him of the need of an anesthetic agent, and he 
determined to find one if possible. 

In 1799 Sir Humphrey Davy, the English chemist, 
announced that the inhalation of nitrous oxide gas would 
produce insensibility and had cured toothache, adding 
these significant words : "As nitrous oxide appears capa- 
ble of destroying pain it may probably be used with ad- 
vantage during surgical operations." Here he stood upon 
the very threshold of the wonderful discovery, but Davy 
was not a medical man, and none were found progressive 
enough to carry out his suggestion. 

Sulphuric ether had been known for a long time, but 
it was regarded as too dangerous to be used. Between 
the years 1795 and 1839, however, different experiment- 



142 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

ors, such as Pareira and Faraday in England, Thompson 
in Scotland, and Godwin, Wood, and others in America, 
showed that the vapor of ether when inhaled would pro- 
duce effects similar to those of nitrous oxide gas, such as 
exhilaration, excitement, laughter, crying, and insensibil- 
ity, and would relieve the spasmodic disorders of colic, 
asthma, and whooping cough, and would cause insensi- 
bility to pain. And yet no one had the courage to employ 
ether in surgery or obstetrics. As late as 1839 Velpeau, 
the famous French surgeon, declared: "To escape pain 
in surgical operations is a chimera which we are not per- 
mitted to look for in our day." 

During the first half of the nineteenth century there 
was an odd class of persons who traveled about the coun- 
try, first in England and later in the United States, lec- 
turing in public on chemistry. One of the features of the 
program was to invite certain members of the audience 
upon the stage to inhale nitrous oxide or ether vapor "for 
the purpose of provoking exhilaration, excitement, semi- 
conscious gyrations, and mirth-producing antics for the 
amusement of the spectators." This first began with the 
use of nitrous oxide, but soon ether became the favorite 
for the reason that it was more easily manipulated. 
(Buxton.) From these strange entertainments evolved 
the so-called ether parties, or "frolics," which became 
popular throughout the country. 

Here it is appropriate to insert Dr. Long's own ac- 
count of how he came to give the first anesthetic for a 
surgical operation, describing his first cases. This state- 
ment was read before the Georgia Medical and Surgical 
Association in 1852. 

"In the Southern Medical and Surgical Journal for December, 
1849, I presented an account of what I considered the first use of 
ether by inhalation as an anesthetic agent in surgical operations; 
a summary of which I will proceed to read to the State Medical 
Society. 



Crawford Williamson Long 143 

"Previous to stating the first operation performed by me with 
ether, I will briefly g'ive the reasons which induced me to make 
experiments in etherization. 

"In the month of December, 1841, or January, 1842, the sub- 
ject of the inhalation of nitrous oxide gas was introduced in a 
company of young men assembled at night in the village of Jeffer- 
son, Ga., and the party requested me to prepare them some. I 
informed them that I had not the requisite apparatus for preparing 
or using the gas, but that I had an article (sulphuric ether), which 
would produce equally exhilarating effects and was as safe. The 
company was anxious to witness its effects; the ether was pro- 
duced, and all present, in turn, inhaled. They were so much pleased 
with its effects that they afterwards frequently used it and induced 
others to use it, and the practice became quite fashionable in the 
county and some of the contiguous counties. On numerous occa- 
sions I inhaled the ether for its exhilarating properties and would 
frequently at some short time subsequently discover bruises or 
painful spots on my person which I had no recollection of causing, 
and which I felt satisfied were received while under the influence of 
ether. I noticed my friends, while etherized, received falls and 
blows, which I believed sufficient to cause pain on a person not in 
a state of anesthesia, and, on questioning them they uniformly 
assured me that they did not feel the least pain from these acci- 
dents. 

"Observing these facts I was led to believe that anesthesia 
was produced by the inhalation of ether and that its use would be 
applicable in surgical operations. 

"The first person to whom I administered ether in a surgical 
operation was Mr. James M. Venable, who then resided within two 
miles of Jefferson, and at the present time in Cobb County, Ga. 
Mr. Venable consulted me on several occasions as to the propriety 
of removing two small tumors on the back part of his neck, but 
would postpone from time to time having the operation performed 
from dread of pain. At length I mentioned to him the fact of my 
deceiving bruises while under the influence of the vapor of ether, 
without suffering, and, as I knew him to be fond of and accustomed 
to inhale ether, I suggested to him the probability that the opera- 
tion might be performed without pain, and suggested to him oper- 
ating while he was under its influence. He consented to have one 
tumor removed, and the operation was performed the same even- 
ing. 'The ether was given to Mr. Venable on a towel and when 
fully under its influence, I extirpated the tumor. It was encysted 
and about one-half an inch in diameter. The patient continued to 
inhale ether during the time of the operation, and seemed incredu- 
lous until the tumor was shown to him. He gave no evidence of 
pain during the operation and assured me after it was over that 
he did not experience the least degree of pain from its perform- 
ance. This operation was performed on March 30, 1842. 

"The second operation I performed on a patient etherized was 
on the 6th of June, 1842, and was on the same person for the re- 
moval of the other small tumor. This operation required more 
time than the first from the cyst of the tumor having formed ad- 
hesions to the adjoining parts. The patient was insensible to pain 
during the operation until the last attachment of the cyst of the 



144 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

tumor was separated, when he exhibited si^s of slight suffering, 
but asserted, after the operation was over, that the sensation of 
pain was so slight as scarcely to be perceived. In this operation 
the inhalation of ether ceased before the first incision was made. 
Since that time I have invariably desired patients, when practi- 
cable, to continue the inhalation during the time of the operation. 

"Having permitted such a time to elapse without making 
public my experiments in etherization," (the author states that these 
operations were made known to physicians and the people all about 
Jefferson and Athens at the time they occurred) "in order to show 
the correctness of my statements, I procured the certificate of the 
patient on whom the first operation was performed, the certificates 
of two who were present at the time of the operation, and also 
of his mother, brothers and sisters and a number of his immediate 
friends who heard him speak of the operations soon after they were 
performed. 

"The Southern Medical and Surgical Journal of 1849, Decem- 
ber, contained ibut two of the certificates. I have a number of 
others which may be seen or read, if desired by the Society. 

"My third case was a negro boy who had a disease of the toe 
which rendered amputation necessary, and the operation was per- 
formed July 3, 1842, without the boy evincing the slightest degree 
of pain. 

"These were all the surgical operations performed by me in 
the year 1842 upon patients etherized, no other cases occurring in 
which I believed the inhalation of ether applicable. (Since 1842 I 
have performed one or more operations, annually, on patients in 
a state of etherization. I procured some certificates in regard to 
these operations, but not with the same particularity as in regard 
to the first operations, my sole object being to establish my claim 
to priority of discovery of the power of ether to produce anesthesia. 
However, these certificates can be examined. 

"The reasons which influenced me in not publishing earlier; I 
was anxious before making my publication to try etherization in a 
sufficient number of cases to fully satisfy my mind that anesthesia 
was produced by the ether and was not the effect of the imagina- 
tion, or owing to any peculiar insusceptibility to pain in the persons 
experimented on. 

"At the time I was experimenting with ether, there were phy- 
sicians *high in authority' who were the advocates of 'mesmerism,* 
and recommended the induction of the mesmeric state as adequate 
to prevent pain in surgical operations. Notwithstanding thus sanc- 
tioned, I was an unbeliever in the 'science,* and was of the opinion 
that if the 'mesmeric state' could be produced at all, it was only on 
those of strong imagination and weak minds, and was to be ascribed 
solely to the working of the patient's imagination. Entertaining 
this opinion, I was the more particular in my experiments in ether- 
ization. 

"Surgical operations are not of frequent occurrence in a coun- 
try practice, and especially in the practice of a young physician; 
yet I was fortunate enough to meet with two cases in which I could 
satisfactorily test the anesthetic powers of ether* Prom one of 
these patients I removed three tumors the same day; the inhala- 



Crawford Williamson Long 145 



tion of ether was used only in the second operation and was effect- 
ual in preventing pain, while the patient suffered severely from 
the extirpation of the other two tumors. 

"In another case I 'amputated two fingers of a negro boy; the 
boy being etherized during the operation as to one finger and not 
during the other — ^he suffered from the latter operation and was 
insensible during the other. After fully satisfying myself of the 
power of ether to produce anesthesia, I was desirous of administer- 
ing it in a severer surgical operation than any I had performed. In 
my practice prior to the published account of the use of ether as 
an anesthetic I had no opportunity of experimenting with it in a 
capital operation, my cases being confined, with one exception, to 
excising small tumors and the amputation of fingers and* toes. 
While cautiously experimenting with ether as cases occurred, with 
the view of testing its anesthetic powers and its applicability to 
severe as well as minor surgical operations, others, more favorably 
situated, engaged in similar experiments, and consequently the 
publication of etherization did not 'bide my time*. I know that I 
deferred the publication too long to receive any honor from the 
priority of the discovery, but having by the persuasion of friends 
presented my claims before the profession, I prefer that its cor- 
rectness be fully investigated before the medical society. Should 
the society say that the claim, though well founded, is forfeited by 
not being presented earlier, I will cheerfully respond: *So mote 
it be.* 

"Not wishing to intrude upon the time of the society, I have 
made this short compendium of all the material points stated in 
my article in the Journal: and if the society wishes any further 
information on the subject I will cheerfully comply with their 
wishes. 

(Signed) €. W. LONG, M. D." 

The above paper was read before the Georgia Medi- 
cal Society at its April meeting, 1852 (see Transactions, 
pp. 113-117), which unanimously passed the following 
Resolution : 

"Resolved, That this society is of the opinion that Dr. Craw- 
ford W. Long was the first person who used sulphuric ether as an 
anesthetic in operations, and as an act of justice to him individually 
and to the honor of the profession of our own state, we most earn- 
estly recommend him to present at once his claims to priority in 
the use of this most important agent to the consideration of the 
American Medical Association at its next meeting. 

"DR. DICKINSON, 
"DR. COOPER, 






*PR. iS. N. HARRIS, 

"Committee," 



146 Prank K. Boland, M. D. 

Mr. Venable's story of the first anesthetic is given in 
the following affidavit: 

"I, James M. Venable, of the county of Cobb and State of 
Georgia, on oath depose and say, that in the year 18421 I resided 
at my mother's m Jackson County, about two miles from the village 
of Jefferson, and attended the village academy that year. 

"In the early part of the year the young men of Jefferson and 
the country adjoining were in the habit of inhaling ether for its 
exhilarating powers, and I inhaled it frequently for that purpose, 
and was very fond of its use. 

"While attending the academy I was frequently in the office 
of Dr. C. W. Long, and having two tumors on the hack of my neck, 
I several times spoke to him about the propriety of cutting them 
out, but postponed the operation from time to time. On one occa- 
sion we had some conversation about the probafbility that the tumors 
might be cut out while I was under the influence of s. ether, with- 
out my experiencing pain, and he proposed operating on me while 
under its influence. 

"I agreed to have one tumor cut out and had the operation per- 
formed that evening after school was dismissed. This was in the 
early part of the spring of 1842. 

"I commenced inhaling the ether before the operation was 
commenced and continued it until the operation was over. I did 
not believe the tumor was removed until lit was shown to me. 

"A month or two after this time Dr. C. W. Long cut out the 
other tumor, situated on the same side of my neck. In this opera- 
tion I did not feel the least pain until the last cut was made, when 
I felt a little pain. In this operation I stopped inhaling the ether 
before the operation was finished. 

"I inhaled the ether in both cases, from a towel, which was the 
common method of taking it. 

"JAMES M. VENABLE. 

"Sworn to before me. 

"ALFRED MANES, J. P." 

This operation was done in the presence of four wit- 
nesses, James E. Hayes, A. T. Thurmond, W. H. Thur- 
mond, principal of the academy, and Edmund S. Rawls, 
the last of whom testifies as follows: 

"Georgia, Clarke 'Co. 

"I Edmund S. Rawls, of Rome, Floyd Co. Ga., on oath depose 
and say that — on one occasion during that year (1842) I was pres- 
ent with James M. Venable in the office of Dr. C. W. Long, in 
Jefferson, Jackson Go. Ga., and witnessed Dr. C. W. Long cut out a 
tumor from the side of neck of J. M. Venable while said Venable 
was fully under the effects of the vapor of s. ether inhaled from a 
towel, and without his exhibiting the least symptoms of suffering 
pain from the operation. J. M. Venabk w^s ^o \inconscious of the 



Crawford Williamson Long 147 

operation having: "been performed that he would not feelieve the 
tumor was removed until it was shown him. 

(Signed) E. S. Rawls, M. D. 

"Sworn to 'and subscribed before me this 2nd November, 1853. 

"E. L. NEWTON, J. J. C." 

The opponents of Long's claim to priority in the use 
of anesthesia say that he kept his discovery a secret and 
that he therefore deserved no credit for it. The next two 
certificates from Drs. De LaPerriere and Carlton, promi- 
nent physicians of the community, show that Long's work 
was well-known to citizens of the town of Jefferson and 
neighboring places, particularly Athens, the center of 
learning in Georgia ; that it was considered a remarkable 
discovery by the populace, and that these doctors knew 
of it and realized its importance : 

"Georgia, Jackson County. 

"I, Ange De Laperriere, M. D., do certify that I resided in 
Jefferson County, Georgia,, in the year 1842, and that some time 
in that year I heard James M. Venable, then of said county, speak 
of Dr. C. W. Long^s cutting out two tumors from his neck while 
under the influence of the inhalation of sulphuric ether, without 
pain or being conscious of the performance of the operation. 

"I do further certify that the fact of Dr. €. W. Long using 
sulphuric ether hy inhalation to prevent pain in surgical operations 
was frequently spoken of and notorious in the county of Jackson, 
Georgia in the year of 1842. 

"A. DE LAPERRIERE, M. D. 

"Sworn to and subscribed before me this 30th of March, 1854. 

"N. H. PENDERGRAISIS, J. P." 

"Athens, Clarke Co., Georgia. 

"I. the undersigned, do certify that in May, 1843, I assisted 
Dr. R. D. Moore in amputating the leg of a colored boy Augustus, 
then the property of Mr. Wm. iStroud, who resided in this county; 
and that I distinctly recollect hearing Dr. R. D. Moore say, If I had 
thought of it before leaving home I would have tried Dr. C. W. 
Long's great discovery, namely, the administration of" sulphuric 
ether as an anesthetic in performing the operation. Having neg- 
lected to bring the ether. Dr. Moore finally concluded to influence 
the patient with morphia; under which influence the operation was 
performed. 

"JOS. B. CARLTON, M. D.»' 



148 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

Many other certificates could be offered to prove 
these facts but these seem sufficient for the present nar- 
rative. 

The next man to use surgical anesthesia was Horace 
Wells, of Hartford, Conn., who subjected himself to the 
effects of nitrous oxide gas and had one of his own teeth 
extracted without pain, to test the value of gas as an 
anesthetic, December 11, 1844. Charles T. Jackson, an 
able chemist, at one time a claimant for the honor of 
discovering anesthesia, did not administer ether in any 
operation, but, it is stated, suggested its use to William 
Thomas Green Morton, September 30, 1846, and on this 
date Dr. Morton, a Boston dentist, extracted a tooth under 
ether anesthesia, without pain. Sir James Y. Simpson, 
of England, was the first to use chloroform as an anes- 
thetic, in 1847, but never claimed the distinction of being 
the discoverer of surgical anesthesia. 

Thus it is seen that Crawford Long's use of ether 
as an anesthetic antedates Wells* use of nitrous oxide gas 
two years and eight months, and antedates Morton's 
use of ether by four years and six months. The claim of 
Wells has been recognized by the state of Connecticut, 
that state having erected a monument at Hartford, in- 
scribed, "Horace Wells, who discovered anesthesia." 

Many men whose opinions must be highly regarded 
assign the honor to Morton. Among these may be men- 
tioned the late Sir William Osier, a tireless student of 
medical history ; his eminent colleague at the Johns Hop- 
kins, Professor William Welch ; Dr. W. W. Keen, the ven- 
erable Philadelphia surgeon; Colonel F. H. Garrison, 
author of the "History of Medicine" ; and Drs. W. J. and 
C. H. Mayo, of Rochester, Minn. On the other hand, an 
equal array of authority may be introduced to support 
the claims of Long, such as America's master surgeon, 
Dr. J. Marion Sims ; Dr. Hugh H. Young, the well-known 
Johns Hopkins surgeon; Dr. John Chalmers DaCosta, 



Crawford Williamson Long 149 

professor of surgery in the Jefferson Medical College, 
Philadelphia ; Dudley W. Buxton, the distinguished Eng- 
lish anesthetist, and others. Jackson himself, who in 
1852 was granted a prize by the French Academy of 
Sciences as the discoverer of anesthesia, later withdrew 
his own claim in Long's favor. 

Why should such divergent views be held of this mat- 
ter, when it seems that a little arithmetic should settle it, 
1842 being an earlier date than 1846? The friends of Dr. 
Long thought the question was finally decided, until 1920, 
when the electors of the Hall of Fame of the University 
of New York announced that Dr. Morton had been award- 
ed the place of the discoverer of anesthesia. These elect- 
ors are men and women of the highest type, being the 
leading college presidents, historians, scientists, authors, 
editors, public officials, and justices of the country, three 
physicians being members of the brilliant group of one 
hundred. Fifty-one votes are necessary to elect a candi- 
date to the Hall of Fame, and in the election of 1920 
Morton received 72 votes and Long received 4. The ad- 
herents of Dr. Long knew nothing of the election, and 
were given no opportunity to present his case, whereas 
it is known definitely that all the electors received at least 
one pamphlet which urged in a convincing way Morton's 
right to the honor. Dr. W. H. Welch's Ether Day Address, 
delivered at the Massachusetts General Hospital, where 
Mortpn gave his first demonstration, in 1846. 

Many advocates of Morton's claim admit that Long 
gave the first anesthetic, but should not be called the dis- 
coverer of anesthesia because he did not give it to the 
world. But did Morton give this wonderful boon to the 
world? It was not heralded abroad from the first use he 
made of it, in Sieptember, 1846, in the extraction of a 
tooth. It was the Boston surgeons, Warren, Bigelow, and 
Haygood, who announced the discovery when they per- 
formed an amputation of the thigh, with Morton iadmin- 



150 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

istering the anesthetic, in the Massachusetts General Hos- 
pital, October 16, 1846. Why not give these men the 
credit for the discovery? 

It has already been brought out that Dr. Long pro- 
claimed his discovery to the world with the facilities at 
his command. He had no Warren, Bigelow, and Haygood 
to sponsor his great find and proclaim it to the four cor- 
ners of the globe. Neither was there a large hospital in 
Jefferson, Ga., or anywhere near it, where anesthesia 
might be given a test in a major surgical operation. Long 
made no secret of the matter. He talked of it freely to 
every physician he met. It must be remembered that in 
1842 he had been practicing only a year, and as an un- 
known youth of twenty-seven years he hesitated to give 
the discovery too wide publicity until he had had oppor- 
tunity to test it further. Surgical operations came slowly 
eighty-one years ago to a young physician, practicing in a 
village of two or three hundred people. The records 
show, however, that Long had used ether successfully in 
five operations before the work of Morton was declared 
to the world by the Boston surgeons. 

It has been charged that Dr. Long did not appreciate 
the importance of his discovery, and that he discontinued 
the use of ether. This is incorrect. The records of a 
great many of his cases have been lost, but his family 
preserves enough to show that he employed ether as an 
anesthetic continually from the time of his discovery until 
the day of his death. Ether was used in his obstetrical 
practice almost as a routine, and he performed many am- 
putations and removed tumors, benign and malignant, 
under ether. 

It is to be regretted that tribute cannot be paid to 
Crawford Long without reflecting upon Morton, who has 
been so richly honored, but circumstances will permit of 
no other kind of treatment. William Thomas Green Mor- 
ton is haled as one of the immortals because he was a 



Crawford Williamson Long 151 

benefactor of mankind. Was it the part of a benefactor 
of mankind to patent the beneficial thing, seek to keep 
its identity a secret, and make a great fortune from it? 
The patent was "letheon," which was ether disguised with 
aromatic oils. Only the controversy between Morton and 
Jackson revealed its real nature to the surgeons who were 
using it. Then this man, who has been awarded a place 
in the Hall of Fame, presented a bill in Congress demand- 
ing a grant of $200,000 in recognition of his unselfish ser- 
vices to mankind. The grant was denied and Morton's 
priority in the discovery of anesthesia was not recognized. 
The American Medical Association expressed its disap- 
proval of his conduct in the following resolution, pub- 
lished in its Transactions, volume 15, page 53 : 

"Whereas, In the appropriation bill now pending in Congress 
is a claim donating to Dr. W. T. G. Morton, of Boston, the sum of 
$200,000 as a recognition of his service in introducing sulphuric 
ether as an anesthetic agent; and, 

"Whereas, The said Dr. Morton, by suits brought against char- 
itable medical institutions for an infringement of an alleged patent 
covering all anesthetic agents, not claiming sulphuric ether only, 
but the state of anesthesia, however produced, as his invention, has, 
by this act, put himself beyond the pale of an honorable profession 
and of true laborers in the cause of science and humanity; there- 
fore, 

"Resolved, That the American Medical Association enter their 
protest against any appropriation to Dr. Morton on the ground of 
his unwarrantable assumption of a patent right in anesthesia, and 
further because private beneficence in Boston, New York and 
Philadelphia has already sufficiently rewarded him for any claim 
which he may justly urge." 

If Dr. Joseph Jacobs, that most assiduous student of 
the life and work of Crawford Long, can succeed in prov- 
ing another new point upon which he is now laboring, and 
which he has good reasons to believe to be true, the advo- 
cates of Morton's right to undying fame must be silenced 
forever. For several years Dr. Jacobs was a young 
pharmacist in Dr. Long's drug store in Athens, and no 
living man today is more familiar with the incidents of 
Long's career. It is well known that in 1854 Charles 
Jackson visited Long in Athens, Ga., where he was then 



152 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

practicing, and tried without success to induce Dr. Long 
to unite with him in laying their claims before Congress 
as the real discoverers of anesthesia as opposed to Mor- 
ton. Jackson was then on his way to the gold mines at 
Dahlonega, Ga., in which he was interested. Dr. Jacobs 
believes that this was Jackson's second trip to this part 
of the country, and that his first visit took place in the 
period between Long's first use of ether and the announce- 
ment of Morton's discovery. In those days, in traveling 
to Dahlonega it was necessary to pass through Jefferson. 
Dr. Long's operations under ether were being generally 
discussed at the time, and it is very probable that a scien- 
tific man like Jackson would have heard the report. If 
Dr. Jacobs establishes this supposition as a fact, Morton's 
friends must withdraw another argument which they 
have maintained, that Morton discovered anesthesia inde- 
pendently of Long, although it was subsequent to Long's 
achievement. It is admitted by all that Jackson first sug- 
gested to Morton the use of ether to cause unconscious- 
ness and insensibility to pain. 

Crawford Long has been honored in many ways. 
Various bodies of medical men have adopted resolutions 
expressing the belief that he is entitled to be called the 
discoverer of anesthesia, the latest being the Southern 
Medical Association, which passed such a resolution in 
1922. In 1878 Marion Sims presented the State of Geor- 
gia with a heroic size oil painting to be hung in the state 
capitol. In 1912, the University of Pennsylvania unveiled 
a medallion to perpetuate the memory of its illustrious 
alumnus. The same year Dr. L. G. Hardman, of Com- 
merce, Ga., gave to the town of Jefferson a marble shaft 
commemorating the deed of its former citizen, and in 
1921 a reduplication of the beautiful medallion at the 
University of Pennsylvania was placed on the campus of 
the University of Georgia by Dr. Joseph Jacobs, an alum- 
nus of the institution. 



Crawford Williamson Long 153 

The crowning event of the many which have resulted 
from the discovery of anesthesia, will be on the day when 
Crawford Long's statue is unveiled in Statuary Hall in 
the Capitol at Washington, as one of Georgia's two most 
distinguished sons. The Memorial Association which was 
chartered for this purpose in 1922 is pushing a vigorous 
campaign to raise a sufficient fund, which seems likely to 
succeed at an early date. 

But the propaganda for the sake of truth should not 
end with the dedication of monuments and unveiling of 
paintings. Lovers of truth and justice, and loyal Geor- 
gians, should at all times broadcast the facts concerning 
the discovery of anesthesia. The noble life of Crawford 
Long and his precious gift to mankind should be familiar 
to every school-child. Illogical and unfair have been the 
attempts to impair his status as one of the great bene- 
factors of the race, and the end iprobably is not yet. 
Finally, his rights will receive universal acknowledge- 
ment. The ultimate verdict of history often is delayed 
for many more years than eighty. When it is reached in 
this instance, the name of Crawford Long will rank with 
the greatest in medicine, Harvey, Hunter, Jenner, Pas- 
teur, and Lister. 

Among the principal papers which have been pub- 
lished about Long and the discovery of anesthesia, which 
have been used freely in preparing the present paper, 
are the following : 

The article of Dr. J. Marion Sims, in the Virginia 
Monthly, May, 1877. 

"Long, the Discoverer of Anesthesia. A Presenta- 
tion of His Original Documents." By Hugh H. Young, 
M. D. Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin, August-Septem- 
ber, 1897. 



154 Frank K. Boland, M. D. 

"The Conquest of Pain." By Hansell Crenshaw, 
M. D., Atlanta. Uncle Remus's Magazine, May, 1908. 

"Long and His Discovery." By Isham H. Goss, 
M. D., Journal-Record of Medicine, November, 1908. 

"Crawford W. Long, Discoverer of Anesthesia." By 
Rosa Pendleton Chiles. Munsey's Magazine, August, 
1911. 

"Crawford Williamson Long: the Pioneer of Anes- 
thesia and the First to Suggest and Employ Ether Anes- 
thesia during Surgical Operations." By Dudley W. Bux- 
ton, M. D. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 
of England, 1912, V, 19-45. 

"Documentary Evidence Bearing Upon Dr. Craw- 
ford W. Long's Discovery of Ether Anesthesia." By 
Allen J. Smith, M. D. Old Penn, Weekly Review of the 
University of Pennsylvania, October 2, 1915. 

"Crawford Williamson Long and Ether." By E. M. 
Magruder, M. D. International Journal of Surgery, July 
1917. 

"Lest We Forget, Or Dr. Crawford W. Long, the 
First Anesthetist." By Charles B. Johnson, M. D. Illi- 
nois Medical Journal, August, 1917. 

Dr, Crawford W. Long, the Distinguished Physician- 
Pharmacist, Pamphlet published by Dr. Joseph Jacobs, 
Atlanta, 1919. 



THE YAZOO FRAUD 
By Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

The chapter in Georgia history commonly known as 
the "Yazoo Fraud" is its most disgraceful. It is hard 
to conceive how so prodigious and palpable a fraud could 
have been sanctioned by legislation, and, to a considerable 
extent, consummated. 

It was born of a conspiracy participated in by men 
eminent in national and state affairs, and involving as 
actual participants certainly a large majority of the legis- 
lature of the state, then, of course, comparatively small. 
Those inclined to connect all of the cardinal virtues with 
"the good old days," and to contrast those days with the 
present, to the disadvantage of the present, ought to skip 
this chapter in our history. 

The conspirators conceived some years before the 
passage of the Act of January 7, 1795, the plan of getting 
possession of Georgia's immense Western area, sometimes 
called the Yazoo Lands, out of which area subsequently 
jgrew the states of Alabama and Mississippi. 

Strange though it may seem, one of the chief parties 
was no less a man than James Wilson, of Pennsylvania, 
one of the first Justices of the Supreme Court of the 
United States, and at that time an incumbent of this high 
office. He was eminent as a jurist, as a publicist, and, 
seemingly, as a patriot. He was one of the signers of the 
Declaration of Independence. Mr. Bryce in his work on 
the American Commonwealth refers to him in terms of 
high praise. One of his Pennsylvania admirers calls spe- 
cial attention to his "open, honest and pleasing counte- 
nance." He enjoyed, as a man and as a Judge, the entire 
confidence of all who knew him ; and yet he actively aided 
In the conspiracy, and expected to be one of its largest 



156 Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

beneficiaries. He was an active lobbyist, present in the 
Senate and the House with bribe money in his hands, as 
were a Judge of the United States District Court of Geor- 
gia, a United States Senator from Georgia, who aban- 
doned his seat for this purpose, and at least one Judge of 
the Superior Court of the state, with prominent repre- 
sentatives from other states. Some of the names are now 
familiar, and are borne by descendants of the highest 
and best standing. Money was freely and almost openly 
used to bribe members of the legislature, and it is stated, 
and generally believed, that substantially all of the legis- 
lators (with one honorable exception) were promised an 
interest in the land. 

The area involved consisted of probably forty mil- 
lions of acres. It is sometimes referred to as containing 
thirty-five millions. The price that the four companies to 
which the land was to be conveyed were to pay, totalled 
$500,000.00, or less than two cents an acre, upon the basis 
of thirty-five millions of acres. 

As already noticed, the Act was finally approved Jan- 
uary 7, 1795, by the then Governor, George Mathews. 
This valiant and sturdy soldier of the Revolutionary War, 
almost entirely uneducated, shared largely in the oppro- 
brium which resulted from the discovery of the wrong 
perpetrated upon the people of Georgia and their hot dis- 
pleasure. It is to be hoped, however, that he was not 
guilty of anything more than a culpable weakness. 

The fraud was smuggled through (smuggled so far 
as the people of the state were concerned) by a misleading 
title. The title reads as follows : "An Act supplement- 
ary to an act, entitled 'An act for appropriating a part of 
the unlocated territory of this State for the payment of 
the late State troops, and for other purposes therein men- 
tioned,' declaring the right of this State to the unappro- 
priated territory thereof, for the protection and support 
of the frontiers of this State, and for other purposes." 



The Yazoo Fraud 157 

There was nothing in this title to suggest the sale of 
the lands. In order to prevent, so far as might be, a repe- 
tition of this method of deception in legislation, the con- 
stitution of Georgia adopted in 1798 embodied, at the in- 
stance of James Jackson, the chief exposer of the Yazoo 
Fraud, a provision reading that "No law or ordinance 
shall pass containing any matter different from what is 
expressed in the title thereof." This seems to be the first 
constitutional provision of this character ever adopted in 
the United States. This, or a similar provision, seems 
now to be contained in the organic law of every state in 
the Union, except a few New England states. It is emi- 
nently wholesome and wise. 

The Act of 1795, after the title quoted, asserted the 
right and jurisdiction of Georgia over this Western ter- 
ritory, notwithstanding the Spanish and Indian claims, 
and then proceeds to sell, under the terms of the Act, to 
individuals named, forming companies called the Georgia 
Company, the Georgia Mississippi Company, the Upper 
Mississippi Company, and the Tennessee Company, the 
immense area covered by the act. 

As soon as the people of Georgia awoke to the enor- 
mity and seriousness of the fraud, excitement became 
universal and intense. Indignation meetings and remon- 
strances became general, and their expressions almost 
lurid. General James Jackson, a soldier of the Revolution 
of distinguished career, and afterward Governor of Geor- 
gia, was then serving in the United States Senate as one 
of the two Senators from Georgia, his colleague being 
James Gunn (a prominent officer in the Revolutionary 
War) who was perhaps the leader of the conspiracy. 
Upon petition of the people of Georgia, General Jackson 
resigned his office as Senator, then having four years to 
run, came to Savannah, and ran for the legislature from 
Chatham on the Anti- Yazoo Fraud issue. He was elected 
by a large majority, and by speech and letters conserved 



158 Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

and stimulated the indignation of the people. He de- 
nounced unsparingly the guilty parties, regardless of their 
position, wealth, and influence, and exhibited, as he al- 
ways did, the highest qualities of physical and moral cour- 
age. He had several duels as the result of his denuncia- 
tions, and finally, after he had succeeded in passing the 
repealing act and undoing, as far as it was possible for 
Georgia to do so, the wrong, he lost his life as the conse- 
quence of wounds received in a duel, supposed to be the 
result of his course in connection with this matter. 

The legislature which met the next year passed an 
act approved February 13, 1796, declaring "null and void 
a certain usurped Act passed by the Legislature of this 
State on the 7th day of January, 1795, under the pretend- 
ed title" (here the title is quoted) . The preamble of this 
act recites that "Whereas, the free citizens of this State, 
or in other words the community thereof, are essentially 
the source of the sovereignty of the State, and no indi- 
vidual or body of men can be entitled to, or vested with 
any authority which is not expressly derived from that 
source, and the exercise or assumption of powers not so 
derived become of themselves oppression and usurpation ; 
which it is the right and duty of the people or their rep- 
resentatives to resist, and to restore the rights of the 
community so usurped and infringed.** It then proceeds 
to express the usurpation of power by the legislature that 
passed the act. It quotes the dissent of the Governor 
when the first act was proposed in the year 1794, and 
after very full recitals to justify the passage of the re- 
scinding act declares the same null and void, and being 
issued without constitutional authority and fraudulently 
obtained, and therefore to be of no binding force, and 
the grants thereunder to be void. 

The second section provides that within three days 
after the passage of the Rescinding Act the different 
branches of the Legislature shall assemble together, at 



The Yazoo Fraud 159 

which meeting the officers shall attend with the several 
records, documents, and deeds in the Secretary's, Sur- 
veyor General's, and other public offices, and which 
records and documents shall then and there be expunged 
from the face and indexes of the books of record of the 
state, and the enrolled law or usurped act shall then be 
publicly burnt, in order that "no trace of so unconstitu- 
tional, vile, and fraudulent a transaction, other than the 
infamy attached to it by this law, shall remain in the 
public offices thereof ; and it is hereby declared the duty 
of the public officers of record, where any conveyance, 
bond, or other deed whatever, shall have been recorded, 
relating to the sale of the said territory under the said 
usurped act, to produce the book wherein the said deed, 
bond or conveyance may be so recorded to the Superior 
Court at the next session of the Court after the passing 
of this law, and which Court is hereby directed to cause 
such Clerk or keeper of the public records of the Court to 
obliterate the same in their presence ; and if such Clerk 
or keeper of records neglect or refuse so to do, he shall 
be and is hereby declared incapable of holding any office 
of trust or confidence in this State, and the Superior Court 
shall suspend him." 

This section then proceeds to provide that "from 
and after the passing of this Act, if any Clerk of a 
County, Notary Public, or other officer keeping record, 
shall enter any transaction, agreement, conveyance, 
grant, law or contract relative to the said purchase under 
the said usurped act, on their books of record, whereby 
claim can be derived of authority of record, he or they 
shall be rendered incapable of holding any office of trust 
or profit within this State, and be liable to a penalty of 
one thousand dollars," etc. 

The provisions noticed of this act were carried out, 
and all record connected with it, with much ceremony, 
was destroyed. The tradition is that a sunglass was 



160 Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

used to start the fire with the rays of the sun, so as to 
suggest that the fire which destroyed was brought down 
from heaven. This ceremony took place at Louisville, 
Ga., to which place the capital had been removed. 

As might have been anticipated, purchasers from the 
original grantees from the state, who themselves had a 
large profit in their purchases, were not content with this 
rescinding act, and the result was the case of Fletcher 
vs. Peck, finally decided by the Supreme Court of the 
United States through the eminent Chief Justice John 
Marshall at the February term, 1810. A reader of the 
decision can hardly avoid the suspicion that the case was 
a "feigned case" for the purpose of getting an adjudica- 
tion. Indeed, Mr. Justice Johnson in his separate opin- 
ion, which concurs in the result, felt constrained to ob- 
serve at the conclusion of his opinion as follows : "I have 
been very unwilling to proceed to the decision of this 
cause at all. It appears to me to bear strong evidence 
upon the face of it of being a mere feigned case. It is 
our duty to decide on the rights, but not on the specula- 
tions of the parties. My confidence, however, in the 
respectable gentlemen who have been engaged for the 
parties induces me to abandon my scruples in the belief 
that they would never consent to impose a mere feigned 
case upon this Court." 

This case has become a landmark, because of the 
importance and vital character of the principles an- 
nounced. It is the first case that set aside as unconstitu- 
tutional and void an act of a sovereign state. The sound- 
ness of the decision has been generally recognized, and 
has been followed frequently. The Court held that the 
law was void under the constitutional principle which 
forbade a state passing a law which impaired the obliga- 
tion of a contract, and that even a sovereign state could 
not, after the grant was executed, repudiate its grant. 
The Court also held that the Legislature of 1795 bad the 



The Yazoo Fraud 161 

power of disposing of the unappropriated lands within 
its own limits, and that the Court was not authorized to 
consider the charge that fraud and corruption had secured 
the passage of the act, and therefore of the grants there- 
under, and that such fraud vitiated the grants. The 
learned Chief Justice, among other things, says : "In this 
case the Legislature may have had ample proof that the 
original grant was obtained by practices which can never 
be too much reprobated, and which would have justified 
its abrogation so far as respected those to whom crime 
was imputable. But the grant, when issued, conveyed an 
estate in fee simple to the grantee, clothed with all the 
solemnities which law can bestow. This estate was trans- 
ferable; and those who purchased parts of it were not 
stained by that guilt which infected the original trans- 
action. Their case is not distinguishable from the ordi- 
nary case of purchasers of a legal estate without knowl- 
edge of any secret fraud which might have led to the 
emanation of the original grant. According to the well 
known course of equity, their rights could not be affected 
by such fraud. Their situation was the same, their title 
was the same, with that of every other member of the 
community who holds land by regular conveyance from 
the original patentee." 

The Court recognized the general rule that one legis- 
lature could not abridge the powers of a succeeding legis- 
lature, and that the succeeding legislature is competent 
to repeal any act which a former legislature was compe- 
tent to pass ; but holds that this principle does not apply 
against parties holding vested rights, and who were not 
parties to the original fraud. The Court then observes 
that "it may well be doubted whether the nature of society 
and of government does not prescribe some limits to the 
legislative power; and, if any be prescribed, where are 



162 Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

they to be found, if the property of an individual, fairly 
and honestly acquired, may be seized without compen- 
sation." 

This last observation seems to be on the line of some 
authorities to the effect that governments are not clothed 
with absolute power, and that, independently of written 
constitutions, there are restrictions upon the legislative 
power growing out of the nature of the civil compact, and 
the rights of man, and that "when certain boundaries are 
over-leaped and a law passed subversive of the great 
principles of republican liberty and natural justice — as, 
for instance, taking away, without cause and for no of- 
fense, the liberty of the citizen — ^then it would become the 
imperative duty of the Courts to pronounce such a statute 
inoperative and void." I might say, by way of parenthe- 
sis, that this is not a safe doctrine when applied to acts 
of the legislature of the state. Under our theory of gov- 
ernment, a state has the power to pass any law, no matter 
how unjust or unreasonable, unless it collides plainly and 
clearly with some principle of the constitution of the 
state, or of the United States. In other words, that we 
do not have to find support of a state statute in the 
constitution, but he who asserts its invalidity must be 
able to put his finger upon the principle to which it is 
opposed, clearly and plainly opposed. With Congress, 
the theory is that it has no power except that which is 
plainly conferred, either in terms or by necessary impli- 
cation, by the constitution, and that unless we can find in 
the national constitution support for an Act of Congress, 
the Act must fail, because not within the terms of the 
grant of power. This is still the theory, and decisions of 
the Supreme Court, even of recent years, have recognized 
this as the theory. In practice, however, it has been 
repeatedly disregarded, and Acts of Congress have been 
sustained which would have given pause to even John 
Marshall, extreme Federalist and Nationalist though he 



The Yazoo Fraud 163 

was. Continuing the parenthesis, I may add that one of 
the great evils of the day is the ignoring of the wholesome 
and fundamental difference between the powers of a 
state legislature and the powers of Congress. We are 
drifting constantly toward centralization and the utter 
destruction of autonomy of the states, and that "most 
even balance" between national and state rights essential 
to the preservation of both. 

Prior to the introduction of the Rescinding Act, the 
legislature appointed by ballot a committee of nine mem- 
bers for the purpose of examining and reporting to the 
House as to the validity and constitutionality of the 
original act. This committee was appointed by ballot, 
and consisted of James Jackson, William Few, James 
Jones, John Moore, David B. Mitchell, James H. Ruther- 
ford, David Emanuel, and George Franklin. 

Strange though it may now seem, this committee met 
with many obstacles and discouragements. They were 
even threatened with personal violence by the advocates 
and beneficiaries of the bill to be considered, who, as al- 
ready noticed, were men of large means and great influ- 
ence. Threats of assassination were indulged in ; but the 
members of the committee were made of stern stuff, and 
did their duty resolutely. On the 23rd of January they 
made a report through their Chairman, James Jackson, 
"that they have had the same under their serious consid- 
eration, and lament that they are compelled to declare, 
that the fraud, corruption, and collusion, by which the 
said act was obtained, and the unconstitutionality of the 
same, evinces the utmost depravity in the majority of the 
late legislature." "It appears to your committee, that 
the public good was placed entirely out of view, and pri- 
vate interest alone consulted ; that the rights of the pres- 
ent generation were violated, and the rights of posterity 
bartered, by the said act; and that by it, the bounds of 
equal rights were broken down, and the principles of aris- 



164 Hon. Samuel B. Adams 

tocracy established in their stead. The Committee 
(whilst they thus with shame and confusion acknowledge 
that such a Legislature, intrusted with the rights of their 
constituents, should have existed in Georgia), cannot, 
however, forbear to congratulate the present Legislature 
and the community at large, that there are sufficient 
grounds, as well with respect to the unconstitutionality 
of the act, as from the testimony before the committee, 
of the fraud practised to obtain it, to pronounce, that the 
same is a nullity in itself, and not binding or obligatory on 
the people of this State ; and they flatter themselves that 
a declaration to that effect, by a legislative act, will check 
that rapacious and avaricious spirit of speculation which 
has in this State overleaped all decent bounds, and which, 
if it were to continue, would totally annihilate morality 
and good faith from among the citizens of the State. The 
committee, for this purpose, beg leave to report, *An Act 
for declaring the said usurped act void, and for expunging 
the same from the face of the public record' ; and they also 
herewith report testimony taken before them, on the sub- 
ject of the fraud practised to obtain it." 

In the midst of such distressing evidences of fraud 
and corruption, largely on the part of patriots who had 
rendered valiant service in the War for American Inde- 
pendence, it is refreshing to read of the course taken by 
General Jackson and his committee, and the virtue and 
courage displayed by some representative Georgians. 

After the passage of the Repealing Act, Georgia 
ceded to the United States, under an agreement, this en- 
tire area comprising the part dealt with by the Act. In 
1803 the then President, Thomas Jefferson, appointed a 
committee, of which James Madison was chairman, to 
see to an adjustment of the claims of private parties. 
This committee recommended a settlement, which 
Georgia, however, would not accept. After the decision 



The Yazoo Fraud 165 

of the Supreme Court in Fletcher vs. Peck, and in the 
year 1814, Congress appropriated five millions of dollars 
to be realized from the proceeds of the sale of some of 
the land for the purpose of making this settlement. After 
three years the Treasury of the United States reported 
that final settlement had been made, and the sum of 
$4,282,151.00 had been used for this purpose. 

Thus ended the last history of this stupendous dis- 
grace, so far as any public record was concerned, but the 
men concerned in it never escaped the indignation of an 
aroused people. They were all ruined politically and were 
ostracized, and a few found it safe to leave Georgia. 

The history of the fraud, while it impresses and de- 
presses us with the disgrace suffered by our state, yet 
may encourage the thought that the present times may 
not suffer altogether by a contrast with some of "the 
good old days," and that there is still hope for the state. 



"MEMENTO MORI" 
By Elfrida DeRenne Barrow 

Foreword : 

Based upon statistics, the following notes taken from 
the first official register of deaths and burials in the city 
of Savannah, 1803-1806, have certain historical value, al- 
though they are jottings of a rambling nature, slightly 
averse to keeping to the straight and narrow road of 
facts, the whole facts, and nothing but the facts, though 
the path of their choice leads them in a parallel direction, 
with no definite objective in view except the arresting 
interest created by some haphazard individual, where 
sympathy may become aroused or imagination stirred by 
either the pathos or the quaintness of some distinctive 
expression. A few stray names important enough to 
have already found their way into Georgia history receive 
no added mention here ; rather, we allow our thoughts to 
linger over the names of those who, forgotten, have long 
since sunk into successful oblivion. 

Chance allows us a glimpse into a time-worn record 
which bears on its yellowed fly-leaf the slender inscription 
"Memento Mori." Officially catalogued, it is known as 
the Register of Deaths in the City of Savannah, October 
29, 1803, to November 30, 1806, when Savannah was still 
wrapped in the christening robes of a new-born century. 
Her population at this time was about five thousand, and 
a little over six hundred inhabitants, native and foreign, 
departing this life, had their names duly inscribed in the 
register. 

We are soon startled into sympathy by the realization 
that of that number, four hundred and fifty never 
marched beyond their fortieth milestone, and that only a 



"Memento Mori*' 167 

very scattered minority ever conquered the hardships of 
a problematic maturity. Only five or six reached the al- 
lotted three score years and ten, not fifteen clambered 
above the looming sixties, but three or four were allowed 
to totter into the Methuselistic eighties, while more than 
one hundred never crept beyond the shadowed obstacles 
of babyhood. 

The slow scourge of consumption, as well as the dev- 
astating ills of fever, seem to have been the most preva- 
lent among the diseases which proved fatal to their vic- 
tims. Very numerous were the deaths from "Fever," 
"Bilious Fever," and "Inflammation and Fever" in the 
autumn of 1804, while a year later, beginning with the 
late summer months, "Common Fever" and "Bilious and 
Remittent Fever" took an epidemic form, and as many as 
one hundred died from its spreading effects, which, from 
lack of any mention, we may suppose must have been of 
a transmissible nature. 

We come across a few cases of "Hectic Fever," and 
here and there we discover the prototype of hypochondria, 
which, concealed in a galloping pulse, rushes its fright- 
ened victim into eternity through the flaming terrors of 
"Nervous Fever." Again, another fever proved so ob- 
noxious as to have the malodorous prefix of "Putrid" at- 
tached to it as its only convincing definition, and one un- 
fortunate, driven beyond his normal temperature by the 
heat of his hallucinations, was diagnosed as suffering 
from "Insanity Fever." Through such antiquated dis- 
guises it seems easy to distinguish the fevers of modern 
times: malaria and typhoid, for instance, as well as 
yellow fever; surely such must have been the case in a 
type so malignant as to be termed "Black Vomit," which, 
revolting in its darkened repellancy, merges into a more 
optimistic shade of enlightenment with its present color- 
ful appellation. 



168 Elfrida DeRenne Barrow 

Staggering, many fell by the wayside and dozed into 
their last sleep from "Fatigue and Inebriety," or "By 
Hard Drinking," from "Intemperance," "Strong Drink," 
"Excess of Drink" or "Excess of Liquor," and even from 
the modernized effects of "Intoxication." 

"Dropsy in the Head" and "Palsy in the Stomach !" 
What rare ailments were these? Assuredly such terms 
have sent to their graves sufferers whose mysterious 
symptoms will remain forever unsolved. We come across 
a diagnostician whose verdict of "Suddenly" proved en- 
tirely satisfactory as the professional statement required 
by the officials in charge; somewhat in contrast appears 
one of his colleagues, one certainly more painstaking and 
given to patronizing medical terms when possible, yet 
hesitating over an afterthought of doubt, when he pro- 
nounced the death of his patient due to "apoplexy, or 
something nearly as sudden." 

The magnified temperature of our sun-drenched sum- 
mers is brought vividly before us when we find that its 
rays proved fatal to small James Lowden, whose fresh- 
ness of four years was shrivelled into dust by "Sunburn 
and Mortification," and in the case of John Waggoner, 
who was sacrificed to the needless complications of "Com- 
mon Fever, occasioned by hunting and carelessness." The 
latter accusation rather suggests ignorance as being 
perhaps a more fitting synonym. 

Many were those who, regardless of age, were shaken 
into immortality by "A Fit," and we even find a "French 
Apothecary" fading into the unknown through such eu- 
phonic echoes as "La maladie de la Siam." Few indeed 
were the venerable survivors who, drooping under the 
softening influences of time, nodded themselves at last 
into eternal rest, and nothing so intricate as a medical 
nomenclature seemed needed to explain their belated 



"Memento Mori" 169 

departure, for we discover that, still tremulous with life, 
they were yet pronounced immune from all manifesta- 
tions of disease. At least such was the axiom as ex- 
pounded by the learned medicos of the day, and shown 
in such expressions as the following : "Old Age," "Old Age 
and Natural Decay," "Natural Decay," "Decline of Na- 
ture," and "Decay of Nature." Thus we are left to pon- 
der over those slight digressions, due perhaps to doubt 
over the unfamiliar exigencies of second childhood, to- 
gether with added wonderment over the disappearing 
evidences of disintegrating flesh. 

We are introduced to quite a range of "Conditions, 
Trades and Professions." The count must go well over 
fifty. A "Peruke Maker" brings to our minds the arti- 
ficial elegancies required by the fashionable society of 
the day, and it seems easy to visualize the antique appear- 
ance of a "Windsor Chair Maker," "A Cabinet Maker," 
and a "Professor of Musick," which, however, fades into 
contrast when our glance turns to "A Billiard-Table 
Keeper," a "Merchant," a "Farmer," and a "Planter." 

Few must have been the vessels that sailed away 
with their crews intact, for we find where many a "Sea- 
man" and "Mariner" drifted to his last port through the 
unknown peace of a foreign churchyard. We go from 
"Shipwright" to "Sailmaker," and from "Overseer" to 
"Ditcher," "Saddler" and "Farrier." We pause to salute 
an "Old Soldier," while "A Single Man" keeps us at a 
distance with superior aloofness. A sigh escapes us over 
the ill-timed fate of one who, still in mature girlhood, was 
witheringly classed as "A Spinster." And lastly, we 
linger over the perverted career of one who suffered the 
vicissitudes of fortune, "Formerly a Sugar Planter, late- 
ly a Baker." 

In the "Remarks" which are included in the Register, 
frequent meetings with Mrs. Wilson and Mrs. Fitzgerald 



170 Elfrida DeRenne Barrow 

bring us together in mournful intiniacy. Both were the 
rival owners of boarding-houses, but as our glimpses into 
their respective abodes only occur when the door is 
stealthily opened by the undertaker, it seems impossible 
to ascertain the advantageous merits of either ; be it said 
that funerals were more numerous at Mrs. Wilson's, but 
her otherwise enlivening hospitality may have been pro-, 
portionately as popular with the class of guests to which 
she primarily catered. From lack of much mention, Mrs. 
Rice's boarding-house must have occupied an obscure 
spot. However, on one occasion it stands out in a pitiless 
light when we see that "a seaman was turned out of Mrs. 
Rice's Boarding House in distress and was buried from 
the Hospital." The "Remarks" also acquaint us with 
the "Academy of Young Ladies" which existed in those 
days, and the death of Mrs. Hueston shows us that she 
was its "conductor and principal teacher, and in this 
respect her death is a public loss." 

"From August 26 to September 2 [1804], only one 
death took place in this city." This boastful sentence 
forms the "Remarks" which accompany the death notice 
of four-year-old Margaret McDonald, thus reproaching 
her for having been the fatal cause of breaking such an 
unprecedented record. 

More than one mariner breathed his last in the home 
of "Lovie," a free black woman living in Yamacraw, and 
one young Simon Dixon found refuge in the house of 
"Black Bill, a pilot," and perished there "after 5 days 
sickness in poverty and wretchedness," while James 
Burke, a mariner, must have suffered from similar cir- 
cumstances, for we are told that he died leaving "no prop- 
erty; no white person at his funeral, the sexton only ex- 
cepted." Even the Coffee House is mentioned. One or 
two, gaining admittance within its hospitable doors, soon 
changed the convivial atmosphere which its aromatic 



" ' "Memento Mori" 171 

name inspires, to one of funereal gloom when they took 
their departure as fitting occupants of the busy public 
hearse lately acquired by the city. 

Frequent mention is made of the "castaway seamen" 
who, "taken up by the late hard Gales," met final ship- 
wreck at the Poor House, where they were finally rescued 
by death from "hardships received at sea." The "dread- 
ful tempest" of September, 1804, was the cause of casual- 
ties of a tragic nature, and again the mysteries of medi- 
cal phraseology are superseded by the superior obvious- 
ness of such reasons as "By the Fall of a House," or "By 
the Fall of a Chimney." 

What embryo plots for unborn stories lie dormant in 
many of these brief official references which accompany 
most of the names in the Register. For instance, in turn- 
ing over its pages, we first become familiar with the 
seemingly inoffensive name of "Doon," as we read "Wil- 
liam Doon, age 15 days," died in February, 1804. Then 
we find that he was the son of "John Doon," and that 
his death was caused by the "neglect of his mother," and 
he is then branded by the Remarks as being "Illegiti- 
mate." Later, the death of Hannah Shields further ac- 
quaints us that her "husband says she was murdered by 
John Doon." And lastly, a month later, we come across 
the death notice of "John Glascow Doon, son of John 
Doon, age 2 years," and out of our sympathy for those 
blameless infants grows a sense of righteous relief at the 
thought that the sinister burden of so malevolent a name 
will be borne into the future by two less of his hapless 
descendants. 

Another page brings us to "Jane Hendrickson." Vir- 
ulent indeed must have been the nostalgia that proved 
fatal to this young English bride. The Remarks state 
that "this person is said to have broke her heart at not 
going to Liverpool." From the Oyster House where she 



172 Elfrida DeRenne Barrow 

died from "Grief and Fever" we can picture her looking 
out on those bitter waters of separation, listening to dim 
farewells from some out-going vessel, and then to their 
sobbing echoes fading into the ceaseless rhythm of the 
sluggish tides. 

Pathetic are the next two entries. James Leary 
flourished in his "trade and profession" for just one year 
as a "destitute orphan," when "Inflammation and Fever" 
proved the merciful cause of his removal to the home of 
a newly acquired father. The Remarks state further, 
"Mother dead, his father gone 5 months God knows whith- 
er, this poor child died at a Mrs. ManneFs, Bay Lane, sex- 
ton unpaid." Then comes Mary Wilson, whose innocent 
babyhood was blotted out by the branding adjective "the 
reputed daughter of John Alley, Esq." With the bloom 
of her birthright thus besmirched, she passed away with- 
in one day from "Infant Debility," and Mr. Alley was 
allowed to forget the incident from lack of living evidence. 

Glowing in a halo of virtue, we are told in mournful 
stateliness of the death of the still youthful matron Mar- 
garet Millen, who "died at the house of her husband 
(iGeorge Millen, Esq.) in Marion Ward, whence her 
corpse was conveyed to the burying-ground of the city, 
attended by a numerous and respected concourse of the 
inhabitants; who, after hearing a moving discourse on 
this solemn occasion, delivered by the reverend Henry 
Holcombe, retired to their respective abodes ; upon which 
the corpse was put into a coach and carried to Mr. Mil- 
len's country residence, and deposited in a family vault 
there." In contrast, and safely distanced by several 
pages, we come to Jane Crosby, queen of a domain that 
scoffed at propriety. She ended her reign at the age of 
thirty-six, and her death seems to be justly attributed to 
"Dissipation and Distress." From their elevation, these 
twin capitals seem to reproachfully emphasize the depths 
to which her sins had brought her; yet surely the latter 



"Memento Mori" 173 

cause tempers with pity the significance of the former, 
and such must have been its acceptance, for we read that 
her "funeral expenses were defrayed from voluntary con- 
tributions." 

From these many ill-fated members of the weaker 
sex, we pass to those standard bearers of romance, and 
as we come to the name of John Beaumont de Allemagne, 
we write it with a flourish, fully expectant that the aris- 
tocracy of such a title may be equalled by the nobility of 
deeds and adventure. However, we are shocked into the 
truth, when we learn that "formerly a gentleman of great 
fortune, he died of Old Age, and was buried from the 
Poor House at public expense and left no property." 

Regretfully we conjecture over the length of this an- 
cient volume of biography. Perhaps, had it been of more 
youthful proportions a different ending might have found 
its way into the last chapter. And now our glance falls 
on John Baptiste, whom life had thrust upon the stage 
of manhood, and we find that he made a pathetic exit in 
the first act of an unsolved tragedy, to disappear into the 
wings of the hereafter due to a "Broken Heart." What a 
world of speculation for his audience, from the steel-eyed 
critic who frowns contemptuously back on his benign as- 
sociate of a more humble period, to the sympathetic spec- 
tator who, from a shadowed spot, weeps a furtive tear 
for a soul out of breath with the futile struggles of the 
play. 

A hundred years and more have elapsed since the 
ringing down of that final curtain, and the ghosts of its 
many players have long since drifted into the unknown. 
The Register slips from our fingers, its leaves close re- 
luctantly, and we return it to its corner in the cobwebbed 
archives of the past. 



EDITORIAL NOTES. 

Charleston, S. C, was fittingly chosen for the eight- 
eenth annual meeting, April 4-6, of the American Asso- 
ciation of Museums, which combined with its usual 
conferences the observance of the 150th anniversary of 
the oldest museum in the United States : the Charleston 
Museum. At this combined conference and sesqui-cen- 
tennial the Georgia Historical Society was represented 
by the managing editor of the Quarterly, The programs 
of the three-day conference, both for the general sessions 
and the sectional meetings, were full, not only of interest, 
but of a very contagious enthusiasm; the Charleston 
Museum, at which the general sessions and many of the 
sectional meetings were held, offered eloquent testimony 
of the importance of the "museum idea" and its practical 
development; the entire city of Charleston, seemingly, had 
united in a display of hospitality and unique entertain- 
ment which could scarcely be equalled elsewhere, and 
certainly cannot be duplicated. 

It was in the Charleston Library Society, which is 
one of the oldest libraries in the United States still in ex- 
istence, that the Charleston Museum and the museum idea 
had their origin. The account of the formation of the 
Museum, as recorded in the minutes of the "Charlestown 
Library Society" for January 12, 1773, is so interesting 
that we reprint the following from the first number (is- 
sued just before the recent meeting) of the Charleston 
Museum Quarterly. 

"The minutes read quaintly. A new member is ad- 
mitted; a new catalogue of books is approved. Messrs. 
Thomas Heyward, Henry Middleton, and Arthur Middle- 
ton, among others, are fined three pounds each as 'de- 
faulters,' their offense being failure to attend meetings. 
A communication from another member is read, begging 
that he be remitted the fine for non-attendance at the 
last meeting, as he was ill. Books for the library are 



■ " * Editorial Notes 175 

proposed : DuHamel on Agriculture, Mylnes' Institutes of 
Botany ; *Mr. Buf on's natural history with the plates col- 
oured (all the volumes to be sent for as the whole work is 
on the most entertaining and instructing subjects) ;' Dr. 
Peter Kalm's tour through North America; History of 
Kamschatka lately translately from the Russian lan- 
guage ; the 'Antique Paintings of Herculaneum 6 volumes 
elegantly bound/ and the Encyclopedia, whether Paris or 
Geneva edition to be decided. 

"Such serious matters disposed of, attention turns 
to strictly new business. Would we might know the dis- 
cussion which had preceded the action now so formally 
recorded in the elegantly written minutes of this old rec- 
ord book: 

*His Honour the President proposed that a special Committee 
should be appointed for collecting materials for promoting a Nat- 
ural History of this Province which was agreed to & the following 
Gentlemen were appointed thereon viz. Messrs. Baron, Chalmers, 
Colcock, Cosslett, Fayssoux, Grim'ball, P. K. Gordon, Hewat, Hey- 
ward, D. Deas, Art. Middleton, Milligan, Murray, Moultrie, C. C. 
Pinckney, Rhind, Shirley, iSavage, Simpson, Smith & Wells.' 

"This committee included a group of young men, 
educated in England and Scotland and recently returned 
from Europe, whose admission to the Library Society 
during the three past years, the minutes indicate, had 
augmented the purchase of scientific books. — The commit- 
tee countenanced no delay. Appointed January 12th, by 
March 22nd it had outlined the purpose and defined the 
scope of a new museum, a museum for the province, to 
collect the natural history material of the province ; it had 
elected four curators as follows: Charles Cotesworthy 
Pinckney and Thomas Heyward, Jun., Esquires, and Alex- 
ander Baron and Peter Fayssoux, Physicians. These men 
thus became the first museum curators in America." 

When considerably more than a hundred museum 
representatives, from all parts of the United States, gath- 
ered in Charleston in April to commemorate the pioneer 
work which was thus launched, it was to consider plans 



176 Editorial Notes 

for enlarging the activities and increasing the efficiency 
of the museum movement. An elaborate expansion pro- 
gram had been prepared in tentative form, and this was 
discussed in detail at the meetings of all the sections, art, 
science, and history, and reports of the sentiment of these 
smaller meetings were made in general session. The 
program embraces the establishment of permanent head- 
quarters, with a paid secretary and field worker, to give 
more centralized strength to the museum movement as a 
national agency for education, and to extend advice and 
aid to individual communities in museum development. 
The numerous details of the program have been carefully 
worked up in a well unified general scheme for expansion, 
which has been received with an enthusiasm and a spirit 
of co-operation which promises well for its success. 



The Society has received from Hon. S. G. McLendon, 
Secretary of State, a "Photographic copy of the map of 
the boundary line between the State of Georgia and the 
State of Tennessee." The original of the map, which 
bears the date July 13, 1818, is in the Secretary of State's 
office. The copy for which we are indebted to Mr. Mc- 
Lendon is framed, and has been hung in the Library of 
the Society in Savannah. 



The Journal of the Proceedings of the General Coun- 
cil of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Confederate 
States of America, Held in St, PauVs Church, Augusta, 
Ga., . , , , 1862, has been presented to the Society for its 
library, by the Rev. G. Sherwood Whitney, Rector of St. 
Paul's Church, Augusta. The book was found by the 
Rector in the tower of the church, and is now presented 
by him to the Society through the Rt. Rev. Frederick F. 
Reese, Bishop of the Diocese. 



Editorial Notes 177 

Mrs. B. F. Bullard has presented to the library the 
four index volumes to the Colonial and State Records of 
North Carolina. The library contains 10 volumes of the 
Colonial Records, and would like to complete the set, the 
important contents of which are now so easily available 
through the index volumes given us by Mrs. Bullard. 



Just as we are going to press, announcement is made 
of a gift from Mrs. Bullard, of five hundred dollars, 
to be used for the purchase of genealogical books and 
books of Georgia and Southern history. The hearty 
thanks of the Society are due Mrs. Bullard for her 
generosity, which will enable the Society to make some 
very valuable additions to this important department of 
its library. 



A limited number of copies of earlier issues of the 
Qttarterly are still available, and members of the Society 
whose files may lack some numbers are invited to com- 
municate with the managing editor, who will be glad to 
supply the missing numbers while the supply holds out. 

It is still possible to make up a few complete files of 
the Qtiarterly, beginning with the first volume in 1917. 
These complete sets are now offered to members of the 
Society at five dollars a set, in order to give those who 
may desire it the opportunity to secure complete files 
while they are still obtainable. The supply of some num- 
bers is very small. 



BOOK REVIEWS. 

Party Battles of the Jackson Period. By Claude G. 
Bowers. (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1922. pp. 
XIX, 506.) 

The author of this entertaining study of the two 
Jackson administrations has unconsciously described his 
own work in his characterization of Henry Clay. "The 
contribution of new ideas to a discussion was not his 
forte. But he could gather up the material at hand, and 
weave it into a speech [book] of fervent declamation 
[narrative] which created the momentary impression 
that he was breaking virgin soil." Mr. Bowers has gath- 
ered up his material from a comprehensive list of sources, 
in which his investigations have been very carefully 
made. These sources, however, are mainly the well- 
known standard works, both the published writings of 
contemporaries and the studies of later writers. What- 
ever originality the book possesses, therefore, lies in the 
new version of facts which were already well known or 
could be easily ascertained. 

Because this version is told in a clear-cut, rapidly 
moving narrative which cannot fail to be read with inter- 
est, the book will undoubtedly have a wide circulation. 
This is what it deserves, and the author deserves congrat- 
ulations and thanks for having held so close to historical 
accuracy and for having at the same time imparted to his 
work so much live interest. His task in this direction, it 
is true, was the easier because of the unusual degree of 
interest attached to the "brilliant, dramatic, and epochal 
party battles and the fascinating personalities" of the 
period which he treats. Since the author has excluded 
from consideration all issues of the Jackson administra- 
tions which were not directly connected with the politics 
of the time, and confines himself entirely to the dramatic 
party battles and the fascinating personalities, the book 
will undoubtedly have many readers who would not care 



Party Battles of the Jackson Period 179 

for a careful study of the period from a broader view. 
This method of treatment, however, has one unfortunate 
result. The light which plays on the political aspects of 
the great issues of the day is so strong, that the reader 
becomes dazzled. By a deliberate effort he must remind 
himself, occasionally, that the national bank, and the 
questions of nullification, state rights, and secession, al- 
though they had their political side, were not mere polit- 
ical footballs, manufactured for the purpose of permit- 
ting Jackson, Calhoun, Clay, and Webster to indulge their 
political ambitions and animosities. 

In all of us there is a tendency toward hero-worship, 
but it sometimes appears that this tendency is little, if 
any, stronger than its opposite, the pleasure we experi- 
ence in seeing a hero overthrown. Mr. Bowers seems to 
find a good deal of pleasure of this kind. He is anxious 
to have the reader know that all these fascinating per- 
sonalities, whom generations have been taught to respect 
or reverence, were "intensely human in their moral limi- 
tations ;" that "they lived in houses, danced, gambled and 
drank, flattered and flirted, gossiped and lied, in a Wash- 
ington of unpaved streets and sticky black mud, made 
their way to night conferences through dark, treacherous 
thoroughfares, and played their brilliant parts in a be- 
draggled, village-like capital." Clay was an utterly self- 
ish, unscrupulous politician, whose selfishness is the more 
reprehensible because he had the effrontery to state — 
the author cannot forget it — ^that he would "rather be 
right than be president." Calhoun was designing and 
ambitious ; Webster was a hypocritical politician. In 
trying to impress these facts on the reader, the author too 
often sets up what he considers the "fashionable" concept 
of the men, in order to demolish it with facts which are 
taken from the best-known sources, and which would be 
contradicted by few. 

In other ways, too, the book shows that it is not the 
work of a trained historian, but the result of journalistic. 



180 Book Reviews 

rather than historical, instinct. The author has a fond- 
ness for generalization, which leads him into occasional 
statements which will not bear close analysis or too lit- 
eral interpretation : for example, "it is scarcely an exag- 
geration to say that when Martin Van Bur en appeared at 
social functions with the pretty Peggy on his arm, he 
made himself President of the United States/* The pages 
carry a liberal supply of footnote references, many of 
which, however, are hardly essential or are at least of sec- 
ondary importance, while on other points references are 
needed, but are lacking. "Close students of the period 
are now convinced that preliminary to this alliance with 
Jackson an agreement had been made that Calhoun was 
to succeed to the Presidency after four years," but there 
is no citation from these close students. Livingston's 
speech, following the Webster-Hayne debate, "is entitled 
to more consideration from historians than it has re- 
ceived," but it receives little more consideration from 
Mr. Bowers than this brief mention. 

The book has some special interest for Georgians, 
from the fact that William H. Crawford, John McPherson 
Berrien, and John Forsyth, appear in its pages, though 
all of them rather incidentally. In its account of Craw- 
ford's last candidacy for the presidential nomination, the 
book follows the generally prevailing view that his defeat 
was due to a rather unholy alliance on the part of Clay 
and the other candidates, in refusing to enter the Con- 
gressional caucus, and ignores the fact that the caucus 
had been slowly but surely losing its prestige for many 
years, and had become, before 1824, an out-worn institu- 
tion, the days of which were numbered. Crawford's only 
hope of securing the nomination seemed to lie in the 
"regularity" of a caucus nomination, but the revolt 
against the caucus had become so powerful that a nomi- 
nation so secured was very generally brushed aside, as an 
effort at clique-dictation, and as not binding. 

C. S. T. 



PRINTED BY 
REVIEW PUBLISHING a PRINTING COMPANY 
SAVANNAH, GA. 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 

QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 3 



SEPTEMBER, 1923 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 
QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 3 



SEPTEMBER, 1923 



One Dollar a Number Three Dollars a Year 



Entered as second-class matter, April 19, 1923, at the post office at 
Savannah, Ga., under the Act of August 24, 1912. 



N^V. 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

OFFICERS 

President Vice-President 

WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING _ Atlanta 

First Vice-President Vice-President 

R. P. BROOKS Athens LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta 

Vice-President Secretary-Treasurer 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah CHARLES F. GROVES „Savannah 

Librarian 
WILLIAM HARDEN Savannah 

CURATORS 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah HENRY R. GOETCHIUS Columbus 

R. P. BROOKS Athens WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah 

MRS, B. F. BULLARD Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING....- Atlanta 

ANDREW J. COBB J^thens MRS. A. R. LAWTON Savannah 

T. M. CUNNINGHAM, Jb Savannah A. C. NEWELL „.. J^tlanta 

LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta ORVILLE A. PARK -Macon 

P. S. FLIPPIN Macon MRS. GORDON SAUSSY Savannah 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON Savannah 

BOARD OF EDITORS 

ROBERT PRESTON BROOKS University of Georgia 

ELLIS MERTON COULTER University of Georgia 

PERCY SCOTT FLIPPIN Mercer University 

J. G. JOHNSON University of Georgia 

MANAGING EDITOR 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON 
Savannah Public Library 



CONTENTS 

Georgia Appointments By President Washington 

Hon. Warren Grice 181 

The Campaign And Battle of Chickamauga 

Thomas Robson Hay 213 

French Intrusions And Indian Uprisings In Georgia 
And South Carolina (1577-1580) 
Mary Ross 251 

Civil War Incidents In Macon 

Captain John A. Cobb 282 

Book Reviews 285 



Q'he Qeorgid Historical Quarterly 

Uolume Ull SEPTEMBER. 1923 Number 3 



GEORGIA APPOINTMENTS BY PRESIDENT 
WASHINGTON 

By Hon. Warren Grice 
Macon, Ga. 

In the archives of the Bureau of Appointments, De- 
partment of State, at Washington, are most of the appli- 
cations and recommendations for office under our first 
president. It is a pretty well established fact that Wash- 
ington let it be known that those desiring Federal office 
should make written application therefor, and should also 
file such letters of recommendation as the applicant saw 
fit. An examination of these will disclose that there were 
not lacking that day, as in ours, those willing to accept 
office. Indeed, there was no dearth of those who really 
pressed their claims. There were many who applied for 
no particular place, but asked for an appointment gen- 
erally. Many urged as a reason, their poverty; many 
others, their army service. Often it is stated that the 
applicant is "a friend to the present form of government." 
Many references are made to one's position in the state 
convention called to adopt or reject the Federal Constitu- 
tion. The President is addressed sometimes as "Your 
Highness," and occasionally in stranger terms, and the 
communications frequently disclose what seem to be ef- 
forts to flatter. Some of these letters give interesting 
side lights on the men and the times. A few are brutally 
frank in discussing those who have been suggested for 
appointment, as in some instances there are letters advis- 
ing against an appointment for which an application has 
been made. Some men wrote many letters. The most 
prolific letter writer of all, the one who aired his views 



182 Hon. Warren Grice 

oftenest as to probable appointments, and the one who 
was most severe in language concerning certain appli- 
cants, was Jabez Bowen, Sr., residing in Rhode Island, 
two of whose sons had resided in Georgia : Oliver Bowen, 
the Georgia commodore whose gallant deeds at the begin- 
ning of our Revolution have given his name a secure place 
in our annals ; and Jabez Bowen, Jr., an early judge of the 
Eastern Circuit, who was by the General Assembly re- 
moved from office,^ and whose return to New England 
caused no regrets in Georgia.^ There are on file no let- 
ters of recommendation, or protest, or advice, from a 
number of prominent men whose views and opinions we 
would expect to count for much in the councils of the 
appointing power. It may be, of course, that in the be- 
ginning senators and representatives were expected to 
perform the duties prescribed for them by the Constitu- 
tion, instead of making it one of their prime concerns to 
land their constituents in Federal offices. There were no 
recommendations from Senator William Few, nor any 
from George Mathews, John Milledge, George Walton, 
Anthony Wayne, Thomas P. Games, or Josiah Tatnall, 
who were in Congress during Washington's presidency, 
urging the appointment of any of their constituents. It 
may be that during their stay at the seat of government 
they presented to the President, or to some departmental 
head, the claims of some one; but there is an occasional 
letter from Gunn, Jackson, Baldwin, and Willis, as well 
as from others who were not in Congress. 

Few appointments were made by President Washing- 
ton in Georgia. Indeed, besides those to fill offices of a 
local nature, it is believed that James Habersham, as 
Postmaster General, not then a member of the cabinet, 
was the only one of any dignity. 



1 T. U. P. Charlton, Reports, 12. 

2 "A Judge and a Grand Jury" by Judge Walter G. Charlton, Georgia Bar 
Association Report for 1914, p. 206. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 183 

There are letters from Abraham Baldwin, submitting 
as candidates for the appointment "as marshal for Sa- 
vannah Ga. and vicinity" Amasa Jackson, Philip Clayton, 
James M. Simmons, Daniel Gaines, Nicholas Bugg, and 
George Hall. He recommended John King for the post 
of collector at Saint Mary's with the assurance that he 
was a man of integrity and ability. He also recommend- 
ed for appointment as a clerk in the office of the Secretary 
of State, Joseph Parker, stating that "he has been in pub- 
lic life for many years." He wrote in commendation of 
Joseph Clay, Jr., for the district judgeship, saying, "he 
stands high and is a friend of the present form of gov- 
ernment." 

Senator James Gunn recommended George Forster to 
be collector for the port of Sunbury, after James Jones 
had declined the same, the salary being too small. He 
wrote commending John Howell, who desired to be com- 
mander of a cutter on the Southern coast. He recom- 
mended for a judicial position John Houston, stating that 
"he has few superiors in America." 

James Jackson, in behalf of the entire Georgia dele- 
gation, wrote on January 13, 1795, calling attention to 
the fact that thus far this state had received no civil ap- 
pointments at all; and submitted the following for the 
office of Postmaster General of the United States : "Jos- 
eph Habersham, a merchant who performed signal ser- 
vice in the war; Richard Wylly, present loan officer of 
Georgia, formerly deputy quartermaster of the South- 
ern Department under General Lincoln ; Joseph Clay, Jr., 
a lawyer of superior talents ; George Walker, the present 
attorney-general of Georgia. Any one of the above the 
delegation conceives to be capable." 

There are three letters on file from John Berrien: 
one, applying for the appointment as collector of customs 
for Georgia; the second one, renewing his application. 



184 Hon. Warren Grice 

but saying that if that place is refused him, he would 
accept appointment as surveyor or naval officer; and a 
third one in which he applies for the marshalship. 

Both William Pierce and Edward Church twice make 
known their desire to enter the customs service at Savan- 
nah, and so does Zacharius Mcintosh. The latter also put 
in an application for the marghalship. James Hendricks 
of Wilkes County applied for the marshal's place made 
vacant by Colonel Forsyth's death, gives news of the 
affairs in Georgia, and says that the agents of Genet are 
seeking to create trouble with the Spaniards and Indians. 
He twice renews his application. John Habersham, the 
collector of customs at Savannah, recommends one Hil- 
lary to be appointed to a similar post at Brunswick, and 
that Simons Maxwell be made collector at Hardwick. 
William Thompson wished to be United States Marshal, 
and was recommended by Nathaniel Pendleton and 
Matthew McAllister. John Wood of Savannah, who "was 
active by sea and land in the service during the Revolu- 
tion," is by George Houston, John Wallace, Leonard Cecil, 
and Robert Batton, the commissioners of pilotage for the 
port of Savannah, recommended to command of one of 
the revenue cutters. 

Edward White applied for the appointment of sur- 
veyor, and Peleg Greene of Wilkes County, was recom- 
mended by Daniel Gaines for command of a revenue ves- 
sel. There are still other applications for the marshal's 
place from Thomas E. Darsey, Edward Watts of Augusta, 
and Daniel Gaines of Washington. The letter written in 
behalf of the last named by Congressman Willis stated 
that he was a lawyer and in reduced circumstances. 

The foregoing comprise the whole list of the writings 
relating to appointments to office for Georgia^ save those 
which are hereinafter set forth in full. 



8 A calendar of these was published by the Government Printing OfBce, in 
Idol, the publication giving the names, and frequently the dates of the letters, and 
usually a brief reference to the subject matter of the communication. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 185 

One is impressed with the fact that so many of the 
above who were desirous of receiving appointments to 
office in Georgia, did not move to Georgia until after the 
American Revolution, for so often in the application, or 
in a letter of recommendation in support thereof, the 
statement is given of their army service, which discloses 
the fact that they entered the army from other states, 
and only recently had become citizens of Georgia. 

President Washington, besides appointing two mar- 
shals, and customs officials to serve at Savannah, Saint 
Mary's, Brunswick, and Hardwick, appointed two dis- 
trict judges for Georgia, and a district attorney. The 
communications he received concerning these more im- 
portant appointments, together with certain correspond- 
ence bearing on a Georgia judge's ambition to be ap- 
pointed on the Supreme bench, and applications from 
George Walton and Nathan Brownson for other offices, 
are as follows : 

Savannah, Georgia Augt. 24th 1789 
Sir 

I have been informed that it is expected of those who 
wish to receive appointments to office under the general 
Government, that they signify their desire to your Ex- 
ellency in writing together with their Pretentions. 

If a f amely reduced by the fortune of War from Af- 
fluence to Indigence will have any influence my Situation 
in that respect claims attention. As to ability and fidelity 
mine may be judged of by recurrence being had to my 
Education and the different Posts of trust and honor in 
which I have been placed and the Duties of which I have 
discharged acceptably to my Constituents. 

Early in life I received a public and liberal Education 
as will appear by a Catalogue of those admited to Degrees 
in Yale College Connecticut in the year 1761 After 



186 Hon. Warren Grice 

which I applied muself to the Study and practice of physic 
and Surgery till the revolution War commenced at which 
time I took part in the Councils of Georgia till the Year 
1776 when I was elected a delegate to Congress and 
served the remainder of that year and 1778 in that office 
so much to the Satisfaction of my Constituents as to 
obtain the thanks of the Legislature signified to me by 
their Speaker. In the year 1778 I served as Director gen- 
eral of the Hospitals on that unfortunate Expedition to 
Florida. The latter end of the year 1780 I was appointed 
purveyor general of the Southern Department by General 
Greene and afterwards confirmed by Congress. In the 
year 1781 by General Greenes perticular desire I went to 
Georgia in order to make a Devertion in his favour by 
collecting my Countrymen to a point and by the unani- 
mous suffrages of the Legislature was appointed Governor 
of Georgia in which office I served the time limited by 
the Constitution; After which Congress reappointed me 
Purveyor to the Southern Department in which office I 
continued to the end of the War and have had a final 
Settlement and discharge. Since the peace I have acted 
as Senior Assistant Judge of the County where I resided 
and some time as Speaker of ye Genl. Assembly 

It is with pain I have I have wrote so much of myself 
and should not have done it but my Friends charge me 
with want of Duty to myself and Famely in having neg- 
lected this address so long. 

I find by a Bill for establishing the Courts of the 
United States now under the consideration of the General 
Legislature that Marshals & Clarks of District Courts 
will probably be appointed should that take place and my 
Qualifications be thought equal to filling either of those 
offices especially the former Your Nomination of me will 
engage my Gratitude And every exercion will be used by 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 187 

me not disgrace the Appointment. Should those places 
be filled up otherwise Any other appointment which will 
afford an adequate Compensation for industry and fidel- 
ity with such abilities as I possess will be acceptable to 
me I have the honor to be with every sentiment of 
Gratitude and Esteem 
Sir 

Your most Humble Servant 

Nathan Brownson* 
To His Exellency 

The President of the United States 
(Indorsed) 

From 
Nathan Brownson Esq 
for the office of Mar- 
shal or Clerk of the 

District Court of Georgia No. 13 

Savannah August 26th 1789 
Sir, 

Were I to solicit your attention to this application 
when business of greater importance only, did not engage 
it, perhaps it would pass unnoticed, but I flatter myself 
otherwise from the circumstances attending it, — permit 
me Sir to congratulate you upon the organization of the 
General Government & the happy progress made under 
it since the meeting of Congress — under which it is my 
wish to act a small part. Being bred to the profession 
of the Law at Lancaster in Pennsylvania after taking the 
usual degrees at Princeton in Jersey in 1779 I exchanged 



4 A physician, residing on his plantation near the present village of Rice- 
boro, in Liberty County. He was twice eleeted to the Continental Congress ; mem- 
ber of the Georgia Convention that ratified the Federal Constitution ; President 
of the State Senate ; member of the Georgia Convention of 1789 ; one of the 
original trustees appointed in 1785 to promote the establishment of an institution 
of learning which later became the University of Georgia ; one of the commis- 
sioners to superintend the erection of the public buildings at Louisville prepara- 
tory to the removal of the capital there ; besides filling the ofliices referred to in 
this letter. Jones, Biographical Sketches of the Delegates from Georgia to the 
Continental Congress, p. 11. 



188 Hon. Warren Grice 

the Climate of Pennsylva. for one more suited to my habit 
setled in this Town & have practiced upwards of five 
years, the latter three of which I have acted the Charac- 
ter of Attorney General for the State by appointment 
from the Legislature, have been a member of that Body 
& of the Convention for altering our Constitution. 

By a Copy of the Judiciary Bill as passed the Senate 
transmited me by Mr Few I find a person will be appoint- 
ed in each District to act in behalf of the United States 
&c. That appointment in this State Sir, would be highly 
gratifying to me, being in some measure habituated to 
business of a like nature from the office I hold. 

I have been induced Sir to be thus particular not hav- 
ing had the Honor of being known to you & have taken 
this liberty from information that direct application is 
usual & required. Should I in this instance be noticed it 
will be highly satisfactory. — 

I am Sir with Sentiments of 
the highest respect & Esteem 

Your most obdt & 
very Hbe Servt 

Matthew McAllister 
The President of 
the 

United States 
(Indorsed) From 1789 

Matthew McAlister Esq: 
for the office of Atty 
for the U. S. in the dis- 
trict of Georgia — 

Savannah August 29th. 1789 

To repeat an address to the President of the United 
States on the same subject (small in itself) when business 
of the utmost moment must necessarily be crowding on 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 189 

the mind can only be apologized for, by the shortness of 
the time, & the motive which induces it, an anxious desire 
to have some small share in endeavouring to give an early, 
but feeble aid to the administration of the statutes under 
the United System, although opportunity left little more 
in my power (than the best of wishes) in bringing about 
the cause, — The purport of this Letter I made free to 
communicate via Baltimore the 26th instant, & lest that 
might be mislaid, have troubled you Sir, with this. — 

Suffer me again Sir, to congratulate you upon the 
organization of the General Government, founded on a 
resolution more glorious, in my opinion, than any that 
have graced the annals of time, & the bright prospect of 
happiness we have every reason to expect in the adminis- 
tration of it, Under which I have expressed a wish to act 
an early, but a small part. 

Having been educated at Princeton in Jersey, & taken 
the usual Degrees in 1779, I read Law at Lancaster in 
Pennsylvania & very soon thereafter made an exchange 
of the climate of that State (my native place) for this 
Savannah & have practiced upwards of five years, the lat- 
ter three of which I have acted the Character of Attorney 
General for the State, by appointment from the Legisla- 
ture, have been a member of that Body, & of the Conven- 
tion for altering our Constitution. 

By a Copy of the Juducuary Bill as passed the Senate, 
& transmited me by Mr. Few I perceive a person will be 
appointed in each district to act as an Attorney in behalf 
of the United States in such district — That appointment 
in this State would be very acceptable, being in some 
measure habituated to business of a like nature from the 
appointment I fill, For information relative to me Sir, 
I must beg leave (if proper) to refer to our Members in 
Congress although my wishes have not been communi- 
cated to all, also to the Honble Thomas McKean & James 



190 Hon. Warren Grice 

Wilson of Philadelphia (if present, to whom the subject 
I believe has been imparted. The Members from Penn- 
sylvania have generally served in the Councils of that 
State with my Father, but (from my leaving the State 
before I went into business) can have but little knowledge 
of me 

I have been induced Sir, to be thus minute not having 
had the Honor of being known to you, & indulged this 
liberty from information that direct application is usual 
& required — 

Should it consist with your opinion Sir, to notice me 
in this instance, it will give me infinite pleasure & attach 
the warmest gratitude. 

I am with Sentiments of 
the utmost respect & Esteem 
Your most obedient 
& very Hble Servt. 

Matthew McAllister^ 

The President 

of the 

United States 
(Indorsed) From 

Mathew McAllister Esq 
for the Office of Attorney 
in the District of 
Georgia— 

1789 
Savannah — August 29th 1789 
Sir 

Matthew McAllister Esqr. informs me he has made 
application to you for the appointment of Attorney for 

5 He received the appointment and was commissioned September 26, 1789, 
and served as such for nearly eight years. He thus became the first United States 
District Attorney for Georgia — an office subsequently filled by his distinguished 
son, Matthew Hall McAllister, and by such prominent Georgians as Robert M. 
Charlton, William Davies, Richard W. Habersham, Charles Harris, Henry R. 
Jackson, D. B. Mitchell, George S. Owens, William H. Stiles, Richard R. Cuyler, 
W. B. Bullock, Joseph Ganahl, and John E. Ward. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 191 

the United States, in this district. This Gentleman has 
served in the Office of Attorney General^ for this State, 
for two years past, during which time I have had con- 
stant opportunity to be acquainted with his capacity, and 
ability in his profession, and know him to be a man of 
Strickt honor and Integrity. At his request, I take the 
Liberty to offer it as my opinion, that he is very well 
qualified to fulfil the duties of the Office he solicits, if he 
should be appointed to it. 

I have the honor to be with the most profound respect, 
and Attachment 

Sir 

Your most Obedient and 
most humble servt. 

Nathi. Pendleton 
(Addressed) 

George Washington Esqr. 

President of the United States 
(Indorsed) From 

The Honble Nathl. Pendleton 
in behalf of 
Mathew McAlister 
1789 
Duplicate via Charleston 
Augusta, 30 August, 1789 
Sir, 

Although I have been employed in the service of Amer- 
ica, in various lines, and almost without interruption, 
since the commencement of the public meetings and dis- 
cussions which led to the Revolution, I do not recollect 
ever to have solicited an appointment. Nor should I now 
trouble you on such a subject, if it had not been suggested 
that my desire of serving in the Judiciary of the Union 



6 In the early days, the attorney general's duties embraced those of our 
present solicitor gener^. He attended the sittings of the Court at Circuit and 
prosecuted in the name of the State. 



192 Hon. Warren Grice 

might be doubted at New- York. — Having a predilection 
for that particular department of service, I take the oc- 
casion of informing you, Sir, that I feel a solicitude to 
devote my future time and reflections to the farther use 
of our now common country, in the office of Judge of the 
District of Georgia. — At the same time I am free to 
declare, that I feel perfectly disposed to give way to tal- 
ents more happy, and to integrity better established. 
Your placing me on the nomination for that appointment 
will have the double effect of giving confidence to my 
public exertions, and of confirming me in those habits 
of esteem and veneration with which I have always been, 
Sir, 

Your most Obedient 
And most Hble servant, 

Geo. Walton^ 
George Washington, esq. 
(Addressed) The President 

of the United States 

New York 

(Indorsed) Geo. Walton 

From 
His Excy Geo. Walton 
for the Office of District 
Judge of Georgia 

Savannah Georgia. July 23d. 1789 

Sir 

Having seen the Bill for establishing the judiciary 
department of the Government of the United States, by 
which a Judge is to be appointed to hold a district inferior 
Court in each State, I presume to trouble your highness 
with an Application for that appointment. As I have not 
had the happiness of any other opportunity to be person- 
ally known to your Highness, than what arose from one 
or two occasional instances of business, I must entreat 



Walton was at this time Governor of Georgia. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 193 

your Highness' permission to mention a few circum- 
stances, which induce me to hope for Success in this 
application. 

I am a native of Virginia, of a family well known to 
your Highness, and their Country. I went at an early 
age, as a Volunteer, with Captain Stephenson's company 
of Riflemen in 1775 to Boston where I obtained a Commis- 
sion in the Army, and continued in it til it was disbanded 
in 1783 — At the unfortunate affair of Fort Washington 
I was made prisoner of War, and remained so from 
Novembr. 1776 til October 1780, when I was exchanged. 
Finding General Greene at Philadelphia on his way to 
take command of the Southern Army, I obtained the ap- 
pointment of one of his Aids de Camp, where I continued 
as long as he continued his command. 

Previous to my going into the Army I had begun my 
Studies under a Gentleman, who was afterwards one of 
your Aids de Camp, and died in your family, Colo. John- 
son. I resumed them during my liesure on Long Island, 
and after the Peace, concluded them under the direction 
of General Pinckney of Charleston. In 1785, I came to 
this State where I entered into the practice of the Law, 
and where I have made an establishment. I have had 
the happiness to make myself so agreeable to the people 
of this State, that in the four Years I have lived here I 
have successively received the appointments of Attorney 
General, member of Congress, and of the Convention 
which framed the present plan of the federal Govern- 
ment, and Cheif Justice, an office I now have the honor 
to hold, after being appointed to it a second time. 

Having trespassed, perhaps too much already, on 
your Highness' time and patience, I beg leave to refer 
you to the Delegates of both Houses of Congress, from 
South Carolina and Georgia, for the particulars of my 
Character — and to Mr. Justice Burke, Mr. Baldwin, Mr. 



194 Hon. Warren Grice 

Few, Mr. William Houstoun, General Jackson, General 
Pinckney, and Mr. Edward Rutledge for my professional 
Talents. I have not named my Uncle, the Chancellor of 
Virga. in this last number, because I have not resided in 
that State since 1775, and I have not seen him since my 
admission to the Bar, consequently he can have no partic- 
ular knowledge of my professional acquirements, tho I 
have constantly corresponded with him on general sub- 
jects of policy and Legislation. 

If I should have mistaken the proper stile of address 
in this Letter, I flatter myself your Highness will excuse 
it — The two Houses of Congress, being of different sen- 
timents on this Subject, I hope it will not be thought 
improper for an individual to use the one most agreeable 
to his Opinion and feelings. — 

I have the Honor to be with the 
highest respect and Veneration 
Your Highness' 

Most obedient and 

most Humble servt. 

Nathl. Pendleton^ 

(Indorsed) From 

The Honble Nathl. Pendleton 
for the Office of 
District Judge 
for Georgia 

Savannah Georgia. March 5th. 1791 
Sir 

I am informed Mr. Rutledge has lately accepted the 
appointment of Cheif Justice of the State of South Caro- 
lina, which will of course oblige him to resign his office 
of assistant Justice in the Supreme Court of the United 
States. 



8 He waa appointed, his commission as District Judge bearinjf date Sep- 
tember 26, 1789. He resigned in 1796. A sketch of his life appears in the 
Report of the Annual Meeting of the Georgia Bar Association for the year 1923. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 195 

When I solicited the appointment of Judge of this 
District, I imagined Congress would have made a more 
ample provision for the Judges, but having, at my own 
solicitation, had the honor to be nominated by you, I could 
not with propriety refuse serving ; altho it will readily be 
admitted by those who knew the extent of my practice 
at the Bar, that the Salary allowed me, was but a small 
Compensation, nor is it, indeed an adequate provision for 
a family in this Country. — Permit me, however. Sir, 
to assure you I feel with equal Sensibility, and gratitude 
the honorable proof you were pleased to give of your 
approbation of my character, and conduct, on that occa- 
sion, — An honor I hope always to merit, as far as fidel- 
ity, and deligence can merit it, whenever I shall be so 
happy as to be distinguished by your nomination to any 
public office. 

Under the impression of these ideas, permit me to 
communicate my wish that it may be agreeable to you 
to put me in nomination to succeed Mr. Rutledge. I 
should not perhaps indulge so flattering a hope on this 
subject but from an idea that you will probably nominate 
some person residing in the Southern circuit — in which 
I now have the honor to be the eldest District Judge — 

If I were to make a particular profession of the per- 
sonal respect and admiration I have always had for your 
Character, and public services, it would have the appear- 
ance, on this occasion, of flowing from other than the real 
motives — ^yet, having served under you as my General, 
from a few weeks after your appointment to that impor- 
tant trust, to the end of the War, I hope to have the credit 
of Sincerity when I profess to be, with sentiments of the 
most respectful and unalterable attachment 



196 Hon. Warren Grice 

Sir, 

Your most obedient, and 
most humble Servant 

Nathl. Pendleton^ 

George Washington 

President &ca. &ca. 

Georgia April the 10th 1791 
Sir 

I was not apprized of the adjournment of Congress, 
nor your intention of visiting the Southern States, til 
after I had sent to the northward, a Letter I did myself 
the honor to address to you of the 5th of last month, of 
which I take the liberty now to inclose a duplicate. The 
recess of Congress made a temporary appointment, to the 
office alluded to, necessary — The information you will 
obtain by being here, I trust will add weight to the mo- 
tives I have ventured to suggest as the foundation of my 
application. 

I have the honor to be 

Sir 
with the highest respect and 
Esteem, Your most Obedient 
and most Humble servant 

Nathl. Pendleton 
George Washington 

President of the United States 
{Indorsed) From 

Nathl. Pendleton 
10th April 1791 
for the Office of Associate Judge 
vice Judge Rutledge 



9 Judge Pendleton was not appointed to the vacancy. The president 
named instead Hon. Thomas Johnson, formerly Governor of Maryland and at 
the time United States District Judge. The Supreme Court had been in existence 
for forty-five years before a Georgian was honored with a seat thereon, Hon. 
James M. Wayne, of Savannah, being appointed January 9, 1835. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 197 

Virga. July 13th. 1792 
Dr. Sir 

I take the liberty of troubling you once more in behalf 
of my Nephew Nathaniel Pendleton junr. of Georgia, who 
wishes to succeed Mr. Rutlidge in the Office he has re- 
signed as a Judge of the Supreme Foedral Court. He 
supposes, a resident in the Southern district will be ap- 
pointed, and that from Georgia, as the Carolinas have 
been already gratified ; — in which case he hopes his pres- 
ent rank of District Judge, will give him preference to 
any competitor there. I have pleasure in hearing he 
stands high in the Opinion of his fellow Citizens, and if 
you think his reasoning sound, and can give him aid in 
his pretensions, It will particularly oblige 
Dr Sir 

Yr. very Affe. & Obt. Servt. 

Edmd Pendletonio 
(Addressed:) The Honble 

James Madison jr. Esqr. 

Philadelphia 
(Indorsed) From 

the Honble Edmd. Pendleton 
to 
Mr Madison 
in behalf of Nathl Pendleton Esq 
for the Office of Associate Judge 
July 13th 1791 

Philadelphia, 1 April, 1796 
Sir, 

The letter enclosed, came under cover to me from 
General Mathews^^ by yesterday's mail. In opening the 
latter, the seal of the former was a little injured. 



10 Four years before, he had presided over the Virginia Convention which 
ratified the Federal Constitution, he himself taking an active part in debate and 
being largely responsible for that State's action thereon. 

11 Was this George Mathews who at the time was Governor of Georgia? 
He had been a member of the first Congress ; had served in the Indian and 
Revolutionary wars, and was a brigadier-general in the expedition for the capture 
of West Florida in 1811. His rank in the War of the Revolution was colonel. 



198 Hon. Warren Grice 

With every consideration of delicacy on my part, and 
of respect to the Executive of the Union on the other, I 
make this the occasion to mention, that, by the same mail, 
as well as by other conveyances, I am advised of such a 
general derangement of public affairs, and of appoint- 
ments, in Georgia, I would willingly undertake some fed- 
eral Employment. 

Having long served in the Judiciary of that State, my 
habits and predilections are in that line; and I should 
have been content to have been continued on the ground 
I had left: but I have been excluded from the appoint- 
ment, and even the Commission, for treating with the 
Creeks for the Oakmulgie lands, has been filled up anew. 

Under this unpleasant prospect, I am induced to offer 
my services to attend the Running of the Southern Bound- 
ary of the United States, under the Spanish Treaty. — 
It is in truth, Sir, not my wish to embarrass by this ap- 
plication, as I make it with doubts ; and shall be content 
with Ihe reasons which shall pass it by. Advancing to a 
declining period of my life, my principal aim in this ad- 
dress is, to place myself in view for service, when a fit 
occasion shall offer. 

With sincere attachment & respect, I am, Sir, 
Yr Obt. Svt. 

Geo. Waltoni2 
George Washington, P. U. S. 
(Indorsed:) From 

Geo. Walton 
1st April 1796 
Requesting an Appointment 
(In pencil by later hand: Signer of Decn of 

Independence) 



12 Walton never received any appointment from Washington. At the 
time this letter was written, he was serving as senator, for which position he had 
been named in 1795 in place of James Jackson, resigned ; but he only served as 
such until April 12, 1796, when Josiah Tattnall, who was elected for the remainder 
of Jackson's term, took his seat. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 199 

Philadelphia Septr. IStii 1796 
Dear Sir 

Altho I am very averse to interest myself about the 
disposition of Public Offices, yet when the calls of Friend- 
ship operate strongly in favour of a Worthy Man, who 
is qualified to perform the Duties of the Station aimed 
at, with reputation to himself. & utility to the Public, I 
find it impossible to resist. And it is upon these prin- 
ciples, that I recommend my Old Colleague in Congress, 
Geo Walton Esqr. to Succeed Judge Pendleton who I am 
informed has resigned. Mr. Walton has already acted 
as Chief Justice of the State of Georgia, is deemed a 
sound good Lawyer and a very Honest Man. 

You are not unacquainted with his Public Services & 
consequently will give to his claim on that Score the 
Weight it deserves, I was long in Congress with him and 
witnessed his exertions upon many important occasions 
during the War 

With perfect Esteem 

I have the honor to be 
Sir 

Your most Obedt Servt 

Robt Morrises 

The President of the United States 
(Addressed) The President of the United States 

Philadelphia 
(Indorsed) From recommends. Geo. 

Robt Morris esqr. Walton to be District 

13 Sept. 1796 Judge of Georgia 



13 This was the eminent financier who is credited with having borrowed 
large sums of money on his personal credit, with which to conduct the war, and 
to whom Washington tendered the post of Secretary of the Treasury. He was 
one of the signers of the Declaration, and as a member of the Constitutional 
Convention at Philadelphia, had nominated Washington to be president of the 
Convention, At the date of this letter, he had but recently retired from the 
United States Senate. 



200 Hon. Warren Grice 

Savannah June 10th 1796 
Sir, 

I have reason to suppose the Judge of this District 
purposes resigning provided a more eligible situation 
shall present itself. 

Should that event take place, or any other by which 
the office he holds may become vacant, I beg leave to sug- 
gest my inclination to succeed him, in case it shall meet 
your approbation. 

This intimation. Sir, would certainly have been with- 
held but from a conjecture that it may have been sug- 
gested I do not wish to hold that Appointment even 
should I have been considered competent to the duties 
of it. 

My inclination in this respect has not been mentioned 
to any of the Gentlemen who represent this State in Con- 
gress — it is therefore the more probable some other per- 
son may be recommended to nomination — At the same 
time I flatter myself that none of the Gentln would do 
more than urge his particular friend. 

If necessary Sir, I must beg leave to refer you to the 
Judges of the Supreme Court of the United States who 
have had occasional opportunities of forming opinions in 
regard to my fitness or otherwise for the Office — to none 
of whom nor to any person in Congress have I communi- 
cated my present desire. 

With sentiments of the highest respect and regard — 
I have the honor to be 
Sir 
Your most obedient Servant 

Matthew Mc.Allister^^ 

The President of the United States 



14 Under the judicial arrangement at that time, two of the Justices of 
the Supreme Court, together with the District Judge, were required to hold a 
session of the Circuit Court in each district once a year. McAlister had of course 
attended these sittings of the Circuit Court, and being District Attorney at the 
time, had been thrown with them professionally. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 201 

(Addressed) The President of the United States 

Philadelphia 
(Indorsed) From 

Mathw. McAllester Esq 
10. June 1796 

Savannah July 25th 1796 
Sir, 

I did myself the honor of writing to you on the lOth 
ulto. stating that I had reason to suppose the Judge of 
this District intended to resign his commission and at 
the same time took the liberty of suggesting my inclina- 
tion to succeed to that office should I be considered com- 
petent to the duties of it. Since then the Judge has in- 
formed me that he has communicated his desire that his 
resignation be dated from the fist of September next. 

Lest my former Letter should not have been received, 
I again beg leave to repeat my wish should it meet your 
approbation. 

If necessary Sir, I must refer you to the Judges of 
the Supreme Court of the United States who have occa- 
sionally been this way.^^ 

I have the honor to be 
Sir 
with Sentiments of the highest 
respect & esteem 

your most obdt. Servant 

Matt: McAllister 
The President of the United States 

(Addressed) Free 

George Washington 
President of the 

United States 

Philadelphia 



15 Justices Blair, Rutledge, Gushing, and Iredell had each been in attend- 
ance at the Circuit Court at Savannah. 



202 Hon. Warren Grice 

(Indorsed) From 

Matthw McAllister 
25th July 1796 

Savannah August 1st 1796 
Sir, 

You will pardon me for the liberty I have taken of 
troubling you on this occasion without the pleasure of 
being personally known to you. 

The Judge of this District informs me that he has 
communicated his intention of resigning on the 1st. of 
Septr next. It is my wish to succeed to that office should 
I be considered competent to the duties of it. 

After taking the usual degree at Princeton College 
in 1778 I read Law four years and have been in practice 
without interruption for thirteen — Three of which time 
I was the Atty Genl. of this State and have been the Atty 
for this District since the organization of the National 
Government. 

As the president may probably be at Mount Vernon, 
I conceived there would be no impropriety in letting my 
intentions be known at the Seat of Government. 

For information relative to my pretensions I know of 
no better fountain than the Judges of the Supreme Court 
of the United States, to whom (if proper). Sir, I beg 
leave to refer — I would likewise mention Judge Pendle- 
ton who informs me he will be in Philada. on the 1st 
Septr. he commenced practice with me in this State. 

I have not mentioned this matter to any of our Mem- 
bers of Congress who may now be in Philada. The dis- 
tracted condition of our State would lead me not to wish 
the interference of any partial State influence were I 
even persuaded that such interference could in an appli- 
cation for an Appointment of this nature have any effect. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 203 

Should the information you may receive enable you 
to forward my inclination in this regard, I shall have no 
doubt of your good offices in my favor. 

I have the honor to be Sir, with Sentiments 
of much respect 

Your most obedient Servant 

Matt. Mc.Allister 
Honble 

Timothy Pickering — Secretary of State 
(Addressed) The Honble 

Timothy Pickering Esqr. 
Secretary of State 

Philada. 
(Indorsed) 1796 

Matthew McAllister Esq 
Savannah Augt. 1st 1796 
reed Sept. 2d 
He desires the office of District 
Judge of Georgia 

Savannah Georgia 8th Aug. 1796 
Sir 

Mr. Pendleton, district Judge of this State, having 
removed with his Family, to reside in New York, of Con- 
sequence intends resigning his office. 

Amongst the applications, that may be made for the 
appointment. It is with great deference. Sir, that I am 
emboldened to add to the Number, that may Solicit you 
on this occasion. If my Situation and Character be such, 
as to warrant me in the Application, I flatter myself that 
altho not having the Honour, probably of being much 
known to, or heard of, by you. Yet, the result of your 
enquiries, I trust, cannot but terminate in my ff avor. 

As a native of this State, whose Grand Father^^ and 
ffamily, were amongst the first to Migrate and Settle in 



16 This grandfather was William Stephens, once president of the Colony 
of Georgia. 



204 Hon. Warren Grice 

Georgia — I cannot but feel, for its Welfare and Dignity. 

Being early Brought up in the Study of the Law, in 
this Country, I had the good Fortune, previous to the 
revolution, to profit myself, by obtaining, a more General 
knowledge of the profession, by Study in the Inns of 
Court, attached to Westminster Hall, and returning, en- 
tered into a Liberal practice. Shared the Vicissitudes of 
Fortune, with my Country, during its Greatest Troubles, 
and have now the happiness to see it Flourish. 

If the enjoyment of Legislative, and other Appoint- 
ments by the people, and that too, unsolicited, are marks 
of Confidence, it is with flattering truth, I can assert, I 
have a full share, as well of the public, as private Testi- 
mony of my Fellow Citizens. Under the protection of 
providence, my circumstances are tolerably easy, but 
feeling a strong desire, to be of Service to my common 
Country, I have not hesitated to trespass on your time, 
by craving the Appointment now about to be vacant. 

If then, Sir, in the exercise of your correct Judgment, 
in the appointment of a Judge of this District, it shall 
occur to you, that my services may be adequate, it will 
not only be considered by me, amongst the first of Honors 
— and that very much heightened, by receiving it from 
your hands, with sentiments, of very high respect 

I am Sir 

Yr. very obt sert. 

Wm. Stephensi^ 
The President 

United States 
(Addressed) The President 

of the 

United States 



17 While Judge Stephens did not receive this appointment, he was named 
as the successor of the one who was, and served as District Judge from October 
22, 1801, until his death on August 6. 1819. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 205 

(Indorsed) From 

Mr Willm. Stephens 
8th Aug. 1796 

Philadelphia 
6th; Septr,. 1796 

Sir, 

Mr Nathaniel Pendleton late District Judge of 
Georgia having quitted that State and as it is understood 
resigned his Commission at the request of Mr William 
Stephens of Savannah I pray leave to mention him to 
your Excellency as a Candidate for the Vacant Seat on 
the District Bench — 

I have known Mr Stephens intimately from my early 
youth and with pleasure offer you assurances of his great 
Probity and respectability — I am certain he is as well 
informed and as Sound a Lawyer as any at Present in 
the State of Georgia Altho' he is not perhaps so eminent 
as a Speaking Counsel at the Bar 

Mr Stephens Studied with a Gentleman of great 
Ability and afterwards had the Advantage of three or 
four Years Attendance at Westminster Hall — From his 
length of practice at the Georgia Bar he has had an op- 
portunity of Maturing Opinions and is not likely to be 
on every occasion pursuing the Uncertain guide of In- 
dividual Immagination — and rejecting precedents and 
long established and Approved Law, to be taking up new 
and Undigested Opinions Call them Principles & fly in 
the face of all Authority and received Law which I can 
Assure you is not unfrequent in this day of Innovation 

Mr Stephens has heretofore filled the Offices of Attor- 
ney General and of Chief Judge of the State of Georgia 
and is at this time a Judge of the Supreme Court^^ of that 



18 While we had a Chief Justice, and Judge Stephens filled that office, 
we had no Supreme Court. The Chief Justice, in colonial days, during the 
Revolution, and for a while afterwards, presided over our highest court. It was 
a nisi prius court, but was never called the Supreme Court. He was called Chief 
Justice from the fact that there were four assistant judges in each county who 
Bat with him. These assistants or associate judges, were usually laymen. 



206 Hon. Warren Grice 

State and no man in Georgia has a greater Weight of 
Character 

I take leave further to mention that Mr Stephens is 
a native of Georgia Son of one of the Original Settlers 
under the Trustees of the Province of Georgia and a de- 
scendant of a very respectable English family — At the 
Commencement of the Revolution he chose to relinquish 
former very flattering offers & prospects in England and 
under that Government — (when from his near relation- 
ship to an English Baronet^^ of a very wealthy & Antient 
family with Considerable parliamentary Interest his Suc- 
cess was Considered as Certain) to take part with his 
Countrymen — I also know Mr Stephens to be a real 
friend to order & good Government in the United States 

I hope I shall be pardoned for the length of this Letter 
but in obeying the request of Mr Stephens to Present him 
to the Notice of the President I felt it a duty to my friend 
to State fully his Pretensions to the Office he Sollicits 
and My own knowledge of his Character & Ability to 
fulfill the duties of the Appointment should he be so 
fortunate as to obtain it — With the greatest Esteem 
and respect 
I am 

Your Excellency's 
Most Obedt 

& Most Humle Servt 

Jacob Read 
The President 

of the United States 
(Indorsed) From 

Jacob Read 
6 Sep: 1796 



19 The paternal great-grandfather of Judge Stephens was Sir William 
Stephens, Baronet, He served for many years in Parliament and was residing 
on the Isle of Wight, as Vice Governor, when William Stephens, his son, who 
followed Oglethorpe to Georgia, and became president of the colony, was bom. 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 207 

recommends. Wm. 
Stephens of Savannah 
to be Dist: Judge of 
Georgia 

Augusta, 20 August, 1796 
Sir, 

I have lately been advised that Judge Pendleton has 
left this State, and that the Office of District Judge, in 
this District, will, of course, become vacant. Indeed, I 
had intimations that this would be the case before, and 
whilst I was at Philadelphia; and the letter I took the 
liberty of writing to you, previous to my leaving that 
place, had this event in contemplation. — Should my 
application meet your approval, and the nomination take 
place, my situation in life will be bettered; and I trust, 
the public and individual Justice be satisfied. — My resi- 
dence will be in Savannah, necessarily, on account of the 
admiralty supervision. 

I cannot forbear to embrace the present occasion of 
congratulating the President of the United States on the 
restoration of that public confidence, so essential in the 
Government of free States. A confidence that was stag- 
gered for the moment by the remains of prejudices deeply 
imbibed against a Nation during the convulsions of a 
great Revolution ; and which inspired involuntary horror 
at any Treaty of Amity with her. But reflection and ex- 
perience have already opened the doors of Discernment 
and good sense in the minds of the people ; and the Treaty 
which has been made is beginning to be considered as an 
auspicious aera in the history of the United States: by 
its power of preserving the blessings of Peace, and sub- 
duing the prejudices of men. 



208 Hon. Warren Grice 

Undoubtedly, Sir, I wish you much health. Tranquil- 
ity will follow of course. For I am, with great attach- 
ment and Respect, 

Your most Obt. Sevt 

Geo Walton 
The President of the 
United-States 

(Addressed) George Washington 
President of the 
United States 

(Indorsed) From 

Geo Walton 
20 August 1796 
soliciting the Dist. 
Judgeship of Georgia 

Savannah July the 25th 1796 

Sir 

Having been informed that Judge Pendleton has for- 
warded to you the resignation of his office as Judge of 
the district of Georgia I take the liberty of proposing 
myself to your Excellency as a candidate for that office. 

I have the honor to be 
Your Excellency's 

obedt. huble servt. 

Josh: Clay junr2o 
His Excely. 

George Washington esqr. 

(Addressed) His Excelly 

George Washington 
President 
of the 
United States 



20 If one has to apply for judicial office, is not this letter a model? 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 209 

(Indorsed) [From] 

Mr Joseph Clay 
25th July 1796 

1796 
Charleston S. Carol. August 6 
Dear Sir 

The kindness which I experienced at Your hands in 
calling me unsolicited to an office of Trust, and in be- 
stowing a liberal approbation of my conduct in that office, 
emboldens me to make application to you on the behalf 
of a friend and a man of worth, who is desirous to be 
honored with your Confidence. It is understood that Mr. 
Justice Pendleton is about to resign the office of District 
Judge of the State of Georgia — 

Mr. Joseph Clay Junr: of Georgia, is disposed to be a 
Candidate for that Office, and he is desirous that this 
inclination should be made known to you. He is not will- 
ing to obtain that by solicitation, to wch: his general 
character may not be deemed to entitle him. Yet he ap- 
prehends that the privacy which he has heretofore culti- 
vated, may have prevented your obtaining much knowl- 
edge of his Character — Under these Circumstances I 
venture to assure you from long & Intimate acquaintance 
with him, that he is distinguished for uniting a sound 
Judgment with firm Integrity, and mild amiable manners. 
He is also eminent in his profession. 

Thus much I have said, because to have said less 
would have been less than the truth — to say more might 
be deemed to proceed from my friendship. 

I owe an apology for Interfering in relation to an ap- 
pointment in another State — Should it be deemed Im- 
proper, I hope I may find Shelter in the purity of my 
motive. Perhaps too afflicted as that State is by violent 
parties, the estimation in which a Gentleman is held in a 
neighbouring State, may be deemed valuable Informa- 
tion, in forming a Judgment of Character. In this re- 



210 Hon. Warren Grice 

spect the testimony of Carolina would be favorable to 
Mr. Clay : He is greatly respected by all the Carolinians 
who have had opportunities of knowing him. 

I remain Dear Sir 

with the greatest respect 
and most Affect : Attachment 
Your most Ob. sevt. 

Henry Wm. DeSaussure^i 
(Addressed) The President of the 

United States 
(Indorsed) From 

Henry Wm. De Saussure 

6 Augt 1796 
recomg. Mr Jos. Clay Jr 
to be Dist. Judge 
of Georgia. 

Long Branch August 1796 
Sir 

I am just informed that the office of District Judge 
in the State of Georgia is become vacant by the resigna- 
tion of Judge Pendleton. 

It is a trust on which the good order of the govern- 
ment, as well as the satisfaction of the people, so much 
depends, that I cannot forbear to express my opinion and 
wishes on the subject of filling that vacancy. The State 
is at this time unhappily in a situation to make it more 
than commonly difficult to collect that satisfactory infor- 
mation which is desirable in making such appointments. 
I sul)mit my opinion with the expectation that it may be 
compared and crossed by the information and opinions 
received from others that a proper result may more read- 
ily be seen. 

21 This is the great Carolinian who is best known as "Chancellor De- 
Saussure." He was by Washington made Director of the Mint. He resigned 
in 1795, bearing with him the expression of the President's satisfaction with the 
discharge of his duties and his regrets at his retirement. It is to this which he 
doubtless refers in the first part of his letters. (O'Neal, Bench and Bar of South 
Carolina, vol. 1, p. 245.) 



Washington's Georgia Appointments 211 

Since the death of the late Judge Houstoun,22 of which 
I am just informed, who had very respectable recommen- 
dations to that office when the first appointment was 
made, my opinion is that Joseph Clay Jr Esqr is the per- 
son most proper to be appointed to the office. His name 
has been before brought into the view of the President, 
if I mistake not, by a unanimous recommendation from 
the Senators and Representatives of that State, for the 
appointment of Attorney General of the United States 
at the time when the late Mr Bradford was appointed. 
Their unanimous opinion at that time is perhaps a strong- 
er testimony in his favor, than can at this time be ob- 
tained for any one. I have intimately known him for 
many years, and have known few persons who have 
possessed so great a share of my respect. He is a native 
of Savannah, of the most respectable connexions. He 
received a regular education at Princeton College. I 
have often heard Dr Witherspoon and Dr Smith observe 
that they had known few superior to him at that College. 
He received his law education under Dr Wythe at Wil- 
liamsburgh in Virginia. His natural talents are very 
distinguishing. His virtues and moral character have 
been uncommonly respected from his childhood. He has 
been a steady friend to the present form of the constitu- 
tion of the United States; and I have no doubt will dis- 
charge the duties of a Judge in a manner to reflect dig- 
nity on the government and to procure the respect and 
confidence of the people. With great respect 

I have the honor to be 
Sir your obedient Servant 

Abr Baldwin28 



22 John Houston, one of the two distinguished sons of Sir Patrick Hous- 
ton. John Houston was a member of the Continental Congress, Governor, and 
the first Judge of the Superior Court of Georgia after the State government was 
organized pursuant to the Federal Constitution. He died at White Bluff near 
Savannah, July 20, 1796. 

28 Baldwin, when this letter waa written, was a Representative in 
Congress. 



212 Hon. Warren Grice 

The President of the United States 
(Indorsed) From 

Abrahm Baldwin Esq 
Augt— 1796 

(In pencil in another hand) 
Joseph Clay Jr 
Philadelphia 10th 

August 1796 
Sir, 

I take the Liberty to enclose you a Letter from Mr. 
Clay, who is a Candidate for the appointment of District 
Judge of the State of Georgia, which he has been in- 
formed is vacant by the resignation of Judge Pendleton. 
Mr. Clay is a Man of Honour and Virtue, and I have 
reason to think that he is well qualified for the appoint- 
ment for which he is a Candidate, but as he is a distant 
connection of mine it is probable that I may overrate his 
Merit on this occasion 

I have the Honour to be, with great respect, 
Sir, 

Your most obedient 
humble servant. 
The President Jos. Habersham^* 

of the United States 
(Addressed) The President 

of the United States 

Mount Vernon 
(Indorsed) From 

Josh Habersham Esq,^ 
1st August 1796 
favor of 

Joseph Clay jun 

I .- - -I ij -I 

24 Habersham was Washington's Postmaster General at this time. Judee 
Clay's father, Joseph Clay, Sr., was first cousin of Mr. Habersham, his grand- 
father, Ralph Clay, having married a sister of James Habersham. Mr. Clay was 
appointed District Judge by Washington to succeed Judge Pendleton who had 
resigned. Judge Clay himself resigned in 1801 to accept an appointment from 
Jefferson as Circuit Judge under the so-called "Midnight Judges Bill" of the 
Adams administration. 



THE CAMPAIGN AND BATTLE OF CHICKAMAUGA 
By Thomas Robson Hay 

Pittsburgh, Pa. 

In the spring of 1863, General U. S. Grant was threat- 
ening Vicksburg, on the Mississippi, with superior forces. 
This same situation existed between the armies of Gen- 
eral W. S. Rosecrans and General Braxton Bragg, who 
still faced each other in middle Tennessee after the bloody 
New Tear's battle of Murf reesboro. 

General Joseph E. Johnston, recuperated from his 
severe wound received at Seven Pines, near Richmond, 
Virginia, in May, 1862, had been assigned to the difficult 
task of commanding Bragg in middle Tennessee and also 
the Confederate forces under General J. C. Pemberton, 
facing Grant in the Vicksburg area.^ In point of fact, 
however, he commanded neither. Both Bragg and Pem- 
berton took their cues from President Jefferson Davis 
and the Richmond authorities, only recognizing John- 
ston as an adviser and as one who might suggest rather 
than as a superior officer and commander. This anoma- 
lous and roving commission of Johnston's was satisfac- 
tory to no one and, in the end, Johnston was neither able 
to save Pemberton and Vicksburg, nor was he able to pro- 
tect Bragg from the results of his own errors of judgment 
and commission, and to avert from him ultimate defeat 
and disaster. 

One of General Johnston's initial acts on assuming 
command was to point out to President Davis and his 
advisers the practical impossibility of simultaneously 
carrying on successful operations in both fields with the 
forces available, and to recommend a concentration either 



1 Special Orders No. 275, Richmond, Va., Nov. 24, 1862, The War of the 
Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate 
Armies, 20, part 2:423. Henceforth cited as O. R. Note— All citations relate to 
the first series unless otherwise stated. 



214 Thomas Robson Hay 

in Tennessee or on the Mississippi, preferably in 
Mississippi. It was Johnston's suggestion that the Con- 
federate troops in the Trans-Mississippi, under General 
T. H. Holmes, cross over to the east bank of the river 
and unite with General Pemberton's forces in a move- 
ment against Grant, Bragg meanwhile holding Rosecrans 
in position, while at the same time co-operating, so far 
as possible, with Pemberton. General Johnston would 
command and direct the combined movement. He pre- 
dicted that an attempt to hold Tennessee and the line of 
the Mississippi, without a concentration of forces in 
either area, would result in the loss of both. A quick 
concentration in either locality and an aggressive forward 
movement could not but be rewarded with success.^ But 
Johnston's plan was not acted on and his "suggestion 
was not adopted nor noticed."' 

Bragg's command had been weakened, just before 
the battle of Murfreesboro, by the transfer of General 
C. L. Stevenson's division from East Tennessee to the 
Mississippi.^ On May 23, 1863, this transfer was con- 
tinued by detaching Breckinridge's division and sending 
it to operate with the forces under Pemberton.^ This de- 
tachment was in itself too small to be of much use against 
Grant, but its removal too greatly weakened Bragg to 
enable him to hope successfully to meet and oppose the 
impending advance of Rosecrans's army. The result of 
the operations as carried out is a matter of history. 
Vicksburg, and with it the control of any part of the 
Mississippi River, was lost in July, and by the end of 
November, Tennessee, too, had been irretrievably lost. 



2 Johnston to Cooper, Nov. 24, 1862, O. R. 20, part 2:424; Johnston to 
Davis, Dec. 22, 1862, Ihid. :459. 

3 Cooper to Johnston, Dec. 3, 1862, O. R. 17, part 2 :777 ; Johnston to 
Cooper, Dec. 6, 1862, O. R. 20, part 2 :441 ; Davis to Johnston, March 6, 1863, 
O. R. 52, part 2:430; J. E. Johnston, Narrative of Military Operations, 148-50. 

4 Special Orders No. 66, Dept. No. 2, Dec. 18, 1862, O. R. 20, part 2:453; 
Johnston to Davis, Dec.3, 1862, Ihid. :436 ; Johnston to Davis, Dec. 22, 1862, 
Ihid. :460 ; Davis to Johnston, Jan. 8, 1863, O. R. 52, part 2 :404, 

5 Hardee to Breckinridge, May 23, 1863, O. R. 23, part 2:849. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 215 

Hampered by interrupted communications, with re- 
sulting scarcity of food, and by the unseasonable weather 
and the impassable condition of the roads, Rosecrans, 
harassed by the authorities in Washington, did what he 
could to get his army in shape to take the field. Bragg, 
as noted, detached troops to assist the hard-pressed Con- 
federates in Mississippi, and it was with a view to pre- 
venting a continuance of this transfer that Rosecrans 
determined to move. He hoped to be able to avoid a gen- 
eral engagement until he could join with Grant, but this 
was not to be. 

As summer approached, making the roads passable, 
and after having accumulated sufficient supplies, re-or- 
ganized and re-fitted his army, and formed an adequate 
cavalry force, Rosecrans, on June 24, 1863, moved out 
from Murfreesboro. His force consisted of the 14th 
Corps, commanded by that fine soldier and sterling leader, 
General George H. Thomas, of whom we shall hear more ; 
the 20th Corps, commanded by General A. McD. McCook, 
one of the fighting McCooks of Ohio; the 21st Corps, 
commanded by General T. L. Crittenden, a son of Senator 
J. J. Crittenden of Kentucky; the Reserve Corps, com- 
manded by General Gordon Granger; and the Cavalry 
Corps, commanded by General Robert B. Mitchell. At 
the time of the advance Rosecrans *s army mustered an 
"aggregate present for duty" of some 100,000 men, of 
whom not over 15,000 were stationed in west Tennessee.^ 

To oppose this force, Bragg had under his command, 
at and about Tullahoma, an army of some 45,000 men, 
divided into two army corps, commanded respectively by 
Generals Leonidas Polk, the Bishop-General, and William 
J. Hardee, the "Old Reliable'* of the western army. The 
cavalry was commanded by General Joseph Wheeler.'^ A 



6 "Abstract from returns. Department of the Cumberland for month of 
May, 1863," O. R. 23, part 2:379. 

7 "Abstract from returns. Army of Tennessee," June 10, 1863, Ibid. :873. 



216 Thomas Robson Hay 

force of some 16,000 men was available for call, in case 
of extreme emergency, from East Tennessee.^ But no 
re-enforcements could be expected from Mississippi, and 
the Richmond authorities, in spite of General Johnston's 
repeated urgings,^ had declined to send any troops, some 
5,000 men, from western Virginia.^^ 

As General Rosecrans was informed that General 
Bragg intended to fight him from his intrenchments at 
Shelbyville, northwest of Tullahoma, and in case of defeat 
to retreat behind his strong fortifications at Tullahoma, 
the Federal commander determined to forego such a cost- 
ly and difficult undertaking and to render these fortified 
places useless, if possible, by turning the Confederate 
right and gaining the railroad crossing at the Elk River, 
in the rear of Tullahoma.^^ By this means it might be 
possible to maneuver Bragg back upon Chattanooga and 
out of it without a battle. The first step looking to the 
accomplishment of this result was well taken and the 
advance well timed and skillfully executed. The cavalry, 
under General D. S. Stanley, made a bold movement 
against Shelbyville, creating the impression of a general 
advance in that direction and thus absorbing Bragg's 
attention. The main body of the Federal army moved in 
force on Hoover's and Liberty Gaps, at which points 
were then stationed General A. P. Stewart's division of 
Polk's corps and General P. R. Cleburne's division of 
Hardee's corps. As they were too weak successfully to 
oppose this advance, and for fear of being cut off, these 
troops retired and, on the night of the 27th of June, Cle- 
burne's command arrived at Tullahoma and went into 



8 "Abstract from returns, Department of East Tennessee, May 31, 1863," 
Ibid. :855. 

9 Johnston to Seddon, Feb. 25, 1863, O. R. 23, part 2 :647 ; Donelson to 
Johnston, March 1, 1863, Ibid. :655 ; Johnston to Seddon, March 2, 1863, Ibid. 
:656 ; Johnston to Polk, March 3, 1863, Ibid. :659 ; Johnston to Seddon, March 
12, 1863, Ibid. :684 ; Cooper to Donelson, March 17, 1863, Ibid. :705 : Donelson to 
Johnston, April 1, 1863, Ibid. :735 ; and ff. 

10 "Abstract of returns from General Humphrey Marshall's command, 
Feb. 18, 1863", Ibid. :638. 

11 Rosecrans Report, O. R. 23, part 1 :404-5 ; D. S. Stanley, Memoirs, 
188flF. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 217 

bivouac. The Federal forces concentrated at Manchester, 
twelve miles northeast of Tullahoma. In spite of the 
heavy rains and "bottomless" roads, Rosecrans lost no 
time in pressing his advantage, by immediately despatch- 
ing strong forces to seize the crossing of the Elk River. 
Bragg, lest he be cut off, again put his army in retreat 
toward Chattanooga. Cleburne's command crossed the 
Elk River and bivouacked at University Place, now Sewa- 
nee College, on the night of July 4. By July 6 Bragg's 
army had retired to the vicinity of Tyner's Station, a few 
miles to the east of Chattanooga, there to await develop- 
ments, Rosecrans likewise halting to consider carefully 
his future course of action. 

Thus in a short campaign of nine days from June 24 
to July 3, 1863, by skillful employment of his numerically 
superior forces and without a battle, Rosecrans had 
driven Bragg from middle Tennessee. On the withdraw- 
al of General Simon B. Buckner's troops from East Ten- 
nessee to re-enforce Bragg, the Federals, under General 
A. E. Burnside, moved into Knoxville. Much good at a 
small loss had been accomplished by the Federal com- 
mander's skillful maneuvers. In the same week with 
Rosecrans's success, Grant entered Vicksburg and re- 
ceived the surrender of its garrison, and Lee, after Get- 
tysburg, had begun his return to Virginia. General 
Johnston's warning and prophecy had been verified and 
fulfilled. Both the Mississippi and the territory west of 
it, and Tennessee, were lost to the Confederacy, never to 
be permanently regained. The people of the North, elated 
with these simultaneous and unexpected successes, looked 
on with eager expectations. 

Meanwhile, in Bragg's army, several changes of im- 
portance took place. On the 14th of July, General W. J. 
Hardee, probably the most reliable and the most aggress- 
ive corps commander west of the Alleghanies, was re- 
lieved of his command and ordered to proceed to Missis- 






218 Thomas Robson Hay 

sippi and report to General J. E. Johnston, to assist in 
opposing Grant's victorious advance from Vicksburg.^^ 
On the 19th, General D. H. Hill, who had served with dis- 
tinction under Lee in Virginia and later in command of 
the Department of North Carolina, was promoted and 
ordered to report to General Bragg for assignment to 
the position vacated by Hardee's transf er.^^ General Hill 
arrived and assumed command on July 24. 

The country around Chattanooga is quite mountain- 
ous and difficult, and after Rosecrans's arrival, he spent 
over a month in securing his lines of communication, in 
getting up supplies, and in evolving a plan whereby he 
could force Bragg Out of Chattanooga. Although other 
less difficult avenues of approach were open to him, he 
decided to move by the most difficult : 1st, because it was 
the way in which he would be least expected to advance ; 
2d, because, by so moving, he could strike directly at 
Dalton, Georgia, to the south of Chattanooga and on 
Bragg's line of communication to Atlanta and the lower 
South; and, 3d, because such a move, while threatening 
Bragg at vital points, would afford ample protection to 
the Federal base at Stevenson, Alabama.^^ The more 
effectively to deceive Bragg, Rosecrans kept the left wing 
of his army stationed on a northeast and southwest line, 
thrown out to the north of Chattanooga so as to menace 
that place, while the bulk of his army moved to the south 
and west and marched over the Raccoon Mountains. 

On August 21 Cleburne's division of Hill's corps had 
been moved over to Harrison's Landing on the Tennessee 
River, to the north of Chattanooga, to prevent the Fed- 
eral troops from crossing at that point, but on the 30th 
it was learned that McCook's and Thomas's corps, of 



12 Seddon to Bragg. July 14, 1863, O. R. 23, part 2:908. 

13 Special Orders No. 165, Richmond, Va., July 13, 1863, O. R. 23, part 
2:908; Special Orders, No. 152, Army of Tennessee, July 19, 1863, Ibid. :918. 

14 Rosecrans Report, O. R. 23, part 1 :404-6 ; John Fiske, The Mississippi 
Valley in the Civil War, 260. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 219 

Rosecrans's army, had crossed the Tennessee River below 
Chattanooga and were threatening Bragg*s rear. By 
the 7th of September, McCook and Thomas had both 
crossed Lookout Mountain, some ten miles east of and 
parallel to the river. McCook occupied Alpine, south 
and west of Pigeon Mountain, and Thomas, to the north 
of that point, took possession of McLemore's Cove, a 
narrow valley between Lookout and Pigeon Mountains. 
Crittenden's corps, the left wing of the Federal army, 
had been moved to the south and west of Chattanooga 
by way of the Sequahatchie Valley and the crossings at 
Bridgeport, Shell Mound, and Battle Creek, and was in 
position to threaten Chattanooga while at the same time 
protecting the Federal left and rear. Bragg, incredulous 
at his foe's audacity, immediately perceived his danger, 
and seeing that his communications were threatened and 
that he was likely to be bottled up in Chattanooga unless 
he acted quickly, evacuated that place, and moved south 
to Lafayette, about twenty-five miles distant, at which 
point he covered the railroad, leading southward, and 
from where he hoped to fall heavily upon the Federal 
columns as they debouched from the mountain passes. On 
the 9th of September, Crittenden's corps moved into 
Chattanooga.15 

Enclosed earthworks had been constructed about 
Chattanooga and perhaps Bragg could have held that 
place, which was the objective point of the Federal cam- 
paign, with a small force, as his communications were 
direct and troops could have been quickly brought up in 
case of need. By so doing, Bragg would have neutralized 
Crittenden's corps and prevented the junction between 
Rosecrans and Burnside at Knoxville.^^ Under similar 
circumstances. General Lee detached General Jubal A. 
Early's division to hold the heights of Fredericksburg 



15 Hill's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:137. 

16 D. H. Hill, "Chickamauga — The Great Battle of the West", in Battles 
& Leaders of the Civil War, 3:641. Henceforth cited as Hill in B <fe L. 



220 Thomas Robson Hay 

and thus neutralize Sedgwick^s corps, while he led the 
main army to attack Hooker at Chancellors ville. Bragg, 
though he apparently felt too weak to spare even one di- 
vision, no doubt knew of the prospective help coming from 
Virginia, a move decided on early in September and 
commenced on the 8th or 9th of that month, ^"^ and of the 
value of Chattanooga as a junction point. In justice to 
Bragg, it should be noted that this value had been largely 
destroyed by the Federal capture of Cumberland Gap and 
the evacuation of Knoxville. Longstreet and his com- 
mand, coming from Virginia, were thus forced to travel 
via the Carolinas and Augusta, Georgia, and on west 
to Atlanta and north to Ringgold.^^ The removal of 
Bragg's entire army to the south of Chattanooga insured 
the junction with Longstreet, and obviated the possibility 
of interference by a movement of Federal troops to the 
south and east of that point for the purpose of getting 
between Chattanooga and Ringgold or Dalton. 

The capture of Chattanooga was hailed with joy by 
the Northern people. It seemed as though everything was 
at last going favorably. By skillful maneuvering the ob- 
jective point of the previous eighteen months of cam- 
paigning had been attained. But in the accomplishment 
the Federal army had become greatly extended. Two 
courses were open to Rosecrans : either to concentrate all 
his forces about Chattanooga and make it a starting point 
for future operations, or the alternative course of pushing 
eastward through the mountains in the hope of cutting 
off the retreat of Bragg's army and annihilating it. In 
an evil moment the latter course was adopted. Duped by 
appearances and misled by false information, Rosecrans 
believed Bragg in precipitous retreat. On the contrary, 
Bragg had come out of Chattanooga full of fight, in order 

17 Lee to Davis, Sept. 9, 1863, Lee's Confidential Dispatches to Davis, 
1862-1865, 126. Henceforth cited as "Lee's Dispatches." ; Lee to Davis, Sept. 7, 
1863, O. R. 29, part 1:706. 

18 James Longstreet, From Manassas to Appomattox, 436ff ; Henceforth 
cited as "Longstreet." ; E. P. Alexander, Military Memoirs of a Confederate, 
454-56: Henceforth cited as Alexander. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 221 

to make secure his communications and his junction with 
Longstreet and to find and defeat his enemy.^^ 

The situation on the 9th of September was as follows : 
Of Rosecrans's army, General McCook was at Alpine; 
General Thomas was moving on Lafayette, via Stevens 
Gap and McLemore's Cove ; and General Crittenden, leav- 
ing one brigade to garrison Chattanooga, was moving 
south on the railroad to Lee's and Gordon's Mills. The 
reserve corps, under General Gordon Granger, was con- 
centrated at Bridgeport on the Tennessee River. Of 
Bragg's army. General Hill's corps, consisting of the divi- 
sions of Cleburne and Breckinridge, was on a line west 
of Lafayette and guarding the passes in Pigeon Mountain, 
Cleburne, wfth headquarters at Dug Gap, being in imme- 
diate charge of the troops guarding this gap and Cat- 
lett's and Bluebird Gaps. Hill was supported by General 
S. B. Buckner's corps, consisting of the troops from East 
Tennessee and A. P. Stewart's division transferred from 
Hill's corps, and by General W. H. T. Walker's corps, 
made up of two small divisions recently arrived from 
Mississippi. General Polk with his corps was at Lee's 
and Gordon's Mills. An excellent opportunity was pre- 
sented to Bragg to strike his enemy in detail. Rosecrans's 
forces were so widely separated that each corps was en- 
tirely isolated. 

For the purpose of dealing a decisive blow at Rose- 
crans, Hindman's division was detached from Polk and 
ordered to move into the north end of McLemore's Cove 
on the morning of the 10th and to attack the Federal 
troops there in flank and rear, while Cleburne led his divi- 
sion through Dug Gap to make a frontal attack, and thus 
to surround and capture the enemy troops stationed 
there.2o But one delay followed another. Hill, in com- 
mand of the corps, was at Dug Gap with Bragg. No 



19 Bragg's Report, O. R. 30, part 2 :27 ; Emerson Opdycke, "Notes on the 
Chickamauga Campaign", in B & L, 3:668-69. 

20 Bragg'B Report, Ibid. :28. 



222 Thomas Robson Hay 

movement was made at that point on the 10th, as Hill 
alleges that obstructions in Dug Gap and the illness of 
Cleburne prevented.21 Buckner was ordered to support 
Hindman, but as Bragg did not insist, no attack was 
made.22 On the 11th Baird's division of Thomases corps 
moved into the Cove to join Negley's, which was already 
there.23 The Confederates were in overwhelming force. 
On the 11th, Cleburne, recovered from his indisposition 
and always eager for a fight, waited in vain for the sound 
of Hindman's guns, which was to be the signal for the 
attack.24 Hindman's orders were not clear and he was 
uncertain as to Bragg's exact intentions.25 In the mean- 
time, the Federals, scenting trouble, withdrew to Stevens 
Gap and took up positions at the foot of and on the sides 
of Lookout Mountain, At 11 A. M. Bragg, unduly 
alarmed at the turn of affairs, wrote Hindman to be care- 
ful and, if opposed by too great force to fall back on La- 
fayette.26 

On the night of September 11, General Bragg, discov- 
ering that he was mistaken with regard to the movements 
and positions of the Federals, especially McCook's corps, 
turned his attention to Crittenden, who was moving on 
Lee's and Gordon's Mills. Polk was ordered to attack at 
dawn of the ISth.^^ Buckner 's corps had been ordered up 
from Lafayette to support the attack, but Bragg, again 
becoming alarmed at the last moment, called off Polk's 
movement and returned to Lafayette, taking Buckner 
with him.28 Another opportunity lost. Lack of informa- 
tion, vacillation, and, later, procrastination, such as had 
characterized the campaign into Kentucky in the previous 



21 Hill's Report, Ibid. :138. 

22 Ibid. 

23 Baird's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :271-72. 

24 Bragg's Report, Ibid. :29. 

25 Hindman's Report, Ibid. :295. 

26 Bragg to Hindman, 11 A. M., Sept. 11, 1863, quoted in Hindman's 
Report, O. R. 30, part 2 :296 ; Jordan & Pryor, Campaigns of Forrest's Cavalry, 
346-47. 

27 Bragg's Report, O. R. 30, part 2 :30 ; Bragg to Polk, 12.30 A. M., Sept. 
13, 1863, Ibid. :50. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 223 

year, had combined to nullify all advantages of position 
and concentration. 

Rosecrans awoke from his delusion that Bragg was 
making a disorderly retreat. If Lee or Jackson had been 
in Bragg's place, Rosecrans's' forces would certainly have 
been destroyed in detail and his brilliant summer cam- 
paign ended in annihilation. But Bragg was too slow 
and uncertain. On September 17, the three Federal corps 
were within supporting distance of each other and on 
the night of the 18th McCook, after a five days' forced 
march, had entirely closed up on Thomases right.^^ Had 
McCook come up two days sooner no battle need have been 
fought at Chickamauga, as Rosecrans could have concen- 
trated his forces at Chattanooga, holding the crests. Look- 
out Mountain, and Missionary Ridge, thus securing his 
line of retreat and his base of supplies and presenting a 
formidable and well posted line to oppose any attacks. 
As it was, Rosecrans was delayed two days in the Chicka- 
mauga valley and Bragg's re-enforcements from Virginia 
were given time to come up. The Federal commander 
was thus obliged to fight in the wrong place and against 
odds. On the other hand, the necessity for bringing 
Longstreet's forces by the roundabout route through the 
Carolinas and Georgia delayed their arrival, and undoubt- 
edly was the salvation of the Federal army. Three brig- 
ades of Longstreet's corps, under General John B. Hood, 
arrived on the 18th and Bragg, knowing that the remain- 
der of the corps would soon come up, made his arrange- 
ments for an attack on the following day — September 
19, 1863.80 

The details of the battle of Chickamauga are some- 
what complicated, but the salient points of the battle are 



28 W. M. Polk, Leonidaa Polk — Bishop & General, 2:248. Henceforth cited 
as Polk. 

29 Rosecrans to McCook, 10.45 a. m., Sept. 18, 1863, O. R. 30, part 1:108; 
Palmer to Rosecrans, 12.30 p. M., Sept. 18, 1863, Ibid. :110 ; C. A. Dana to Sec- 
retary Stanton, 10 A. M., Sept. 17, 1863, Ibid. :188 ; Rosecrans Report, Ibid. :54-55. 

30 Longstreet, 437; Kershaw's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:503; Brage's Re- 
Dort, Ibid. :31. 



224 Thomas Robson Hay 

easy to understand. Bragg's object was to push in be- 
tween the Federal army and Chattanooga, recover the 
ground just lost, and cut Rosecrans's line of supply. The 
effective infantry and artillery strength of the two armies 
was nearly equal, about 50,000 men each, though on the 
first day the Confederates were weaker by the strength 
of McLaws's division, probably some 2,500 men. Bragg, 
however, had about twice as much cavalry (14,260 to 
8,078) .21 Both armies were in Chickamauga valley — 
Rosecrans on the west side of Chickamauga Creek and 
Bragg on the east side. Rosecrans's line of retreat was 
via McFarland and Rossville Gaps in Missionary Ridge, 
to Chattanooga. Bragg, if defeated, would retire south- 
ward, on the railroad, through Ringgold Gap to Dalton, 
Georgia. 

The Confederate plan of attack was much the same 
as at the last battle at Murfreesboro, except that Bragg 
planned to pivot on his left and to press forward with 
his right. But, as matters turned out, there was no gen- 
eral movement all along the line of battle. Instead, the 
fighting was desultory from right to left, without concert 
and at inopportune times.^^ From daylight on the 19th 
until after mid-day, there was a gap of two miles be- 
tween Crittenden and Thomas, but no advantage was 
taken of it.^^ In the afternoon. Hood with his own divi- 
sion and Bushrod Johnson's, gained a momentary success^ 
but was thrown back. The troops under Cheatham and 
A. P. Stewart gained partial successes. The fighting was 
a series of charges and counter-charges, with momentary 
advantage gained first by one side and then by the other. 

Hiirs corps, stationed on the extreme left of the Con- 
federate line about Glass's Mill, was engaged in desultory 
fighting throughout the morning of the 19th. At 3 P. M., 

31 T. L. Livermore, Numbers & Losses in the Civil War, 105-6. 

32 Hill in B & L, S :650. 

33 Alexander, 457. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 225 

General Hill received an order from Bragg to move his 
command to the right of the line.^^ Cleburne's division 
had some six miles to march over a road much obstructed 
with wagons, artillery, and soldiers. He got into position, 
on the extreme right of the Confederate line of battle, 
shortly after sun-down. Opposing him were Baird's and 
R. W. Johnson's divisions of Thomas's corps.^^ These 
troops were in the act of being drawn back to better posi- 
tions in the rear and to be stationed behind breastworks.^^ 
Under orders to attack, Cleburne's division moved for- 
ward in fine style, led by its intrepid chief, Cheatham's 
division, of Polk's corps, advancing on his left. The en- 
emy, recently posted behind hastily constructed breast- 
works, poured a murderous fire into the advancing troops 
and for half an hour Cleburne says "... the firing was 
the heaviest I have ever heard." The first enemy line had 
been quickly passed, but as it was so dark that accurate 
shooting was impossible, the command was halted and 
bivouacked on the field. Cleburne says that he drove the 
enemy for about a mile and a half, capturing some artil- 
lery and prisoners.^'' 

This attack of Cleburne's was ill-advised, as the hour 
was late and any great success would have been difficult 
to follow up in the darkness and over the rugged, wooded 
ground. Cleburne's men were tired from their difficult 
march, and were wet and chilly from the cold north wind 
and from the necessity of fording Chickamauga Creek to 
get into position.38 It would have been better had the 
remaining hour or so of daylight been utilized in getting 
the division into its proper position in readiness for the 
attack on the morrow. It was certain that it would be 



84 Hill's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:140; Cleburne's Report, Ibid. :154. 

35 Ibid. ; I. A. Buck, Cleburne & His Command, 127. Henceforth cited 
as Buck. 

36 Baird's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :276 ; Brannan's Report, Jbid. :400 ; 
R. W. Johnson's Report, Ibid. :535. 

37 Cleburne's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:154. 

38 Ibid.; S. A. M. Wood's Report, Ibid. :159 ; John B. Gordon, Reminis- 
cences of the Civil War, 204. Henceforth cited as Gordon. 



226 Thomas Robson Hay 

made and was, in fact, definitely decided on about mid- 
night of the 19th. 

General D. H. Hill, the corps commander, says that 
the fighting on the 19th was some of the heaviest he had 
ever seen and that he saw no stragglers from Cleburne's 
ranks. The results of the day's fighting were, generally, 
indecisive. Though Thomas had a firm hold on the Ross- 
ville road, his line of retreat, Rosecrans had put most of 
his troops into the fight. The outlook seemed hopeful 
for the Confederates. At 11 P. M. on the 19th, Longstreet 
came up with the rest of his command.^^ 

Because the troops were already approximately in the 
positions assigned as starting points for the operations of 
the next day, and were naturally divided into two wings, 
Bragg, at a conference at his headquarters, determined 
on the hazardous experiment of a change of organization 
on the field of battle and in the face of an active and en- 
terprising opponent. He made the partial and theoretical 
division actual by assigning Longstreet to the command 
of the left wing and Polk to the command of the right. 
This major division involved further sub-division of the 
chief command, without any increase of staff, an already 
noticeable defect in Bragg's organization, and this led to 
unfortunate delays in the opening and aggressive prose- 
cution of the battle on the 20th. Perhaps a more logical 
division of the army, as long as any change in organiza- 
tion was made, would have been to have divided the army 
into three parts, with General D. H. Hill in command of 
the right, Polk of the center, and Longstreet of the left. 
The division made emphatically ignored General Hill, 



39 Hill in B & L, 3:652; HUl's Report, O. B. 30, part 2:140; Longstreefs 
Report, Ibid. :287. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 227 

who had only just been promoted and assigned to the 
army.'^o 

The night of the 19th Bragg announced his purpose 
of adhering to his original plan of battle — ^to attack on 
the right by wheeling on the left as a pivot and thus turn 
the Federal left. The battle was to be begun at daylight 
by HilFs corps, under Polk's command, but one delay fol- 
lowed another and the day was well advanced before his 
(HilFs) troops finally began their forward movement. 

In explanation, General Hill says he "left" his com- 
mand "at 11 o'clock on the night of the 19th, to find Gen- 
eral Bragg at Thedford's Ford ... as I had no orders for 
the next day ..." "About midnight" HilFs adjutant 
general reported that Hill's corps "had been placed under 
command of Lieutenant-General Polk, as wing command- 
er, and that the general (Polk) wished to see me that 
night at Alexander's Bridge, 3 miles distant." Hill says 
that as he "was much exhausted (he) resolved to rest 
until 3 o'clock [a. m.]. At that hour (he) went to Alex- 
ander's Bridge, but failing to find the courier that General 
Polk had placed there" Hill "rode forward to the line of 
battle which [was] reached a little after daylight." As 
rations had been delayed in arrival and "some of the men 
had been without food the day before .... orders were 
given for their prompt issue." "At 7.25 A. M. an order 
.... [just received] from General Polk and addressed to 
[the] division commanders .... [directed] them to ad- 
vance at once. . . General Polk soon after came on the 



40 Bragg's Report, Ibid. :33 ; Hill in B & L, 3:652; Alexander, 457; Polk, 
2 :255 ; Dr. D. H. Hill, a son of General Hill's, suggests, in a letter to the author, 
that this division of the army into two wings was at Longstreet's instigation. 
Until after Jackson's death Lee's army was divided into two corps, but it is 
not apparent that it was a wing division. Lee later divided his army into three 
corps. Bragg's army, after Longstreet's arrival, was divided into five corps, 
namely, those of Polk, Longstreet, Hill, Buckner, and Walker, togetlier with 
Forrest's cavalry. These numerous divisions among such a relatively small force 
were caused by the necessity for recognizing the troops from the different areas 
as tactical units. For example, Buckner's corps was made up largely of organi- 
zations from East Tennessee ; Walker's of troops returned from Mississippi ; 
Longstreet's of troops brought from Virginia; and so on. At no time after 
about September 1, was Bragg's army tactically cohesive. It was rather an 
accretion of miscellaneous forces, all strangers to each other. 



228 Thomas Robson Hay 

field and made no objections" to Hiirs order to delay the 
advance on account of issuing rations. "At 8 o'clock 
General Bragg himself came on the field and [Hill] then 
learned for the first time that an attack had been ordered 
at daylight.''4i 

In connection with the foregoing it should be espe- 
cially noted that Hill, apparently through no specific fault 
of his own, did not know of the orders for the next day 
until 7.25 A. M. ; that after hearing of the plans for the 
day, he suspended the order to attack until the troops 
had been fed. Hill was an officer of sufficient experience 
to have known that, under the conditions that existed at 
the close of the fighting on the 19th, the battle would 
surely be resumed on the 20th. He must have realized 
that any attack, to be effective, should have been made at 
an early hour. In view of these very evident facts, it 
would seem that Hill might have at least issued such 
orders to his division commanders as would have antici- 
pated an early advance and prepared his troops to move 
at a moment's notice. The fact that he spent most of the 
night hunting Bragg and Polk, should not have prevented 
the issuing of the necessary orders to make these very 
obvious preparations. It should also be noted that Polk, 
the wing commander, was not personally on the ground 
to see to it that the attack was not delayed. Certainly, in 
view of the importance of Hill's attack, it is not unrea- 
sonable to insist that Polk should have been on the ground 
to see to it that the forward movement took place with- 
out delay. Polk's formations, too, were faulty, and in- 
stead of communicating his orders to Hill, as he should 
have done, he "addressed" them to Cleburne and Breck- 
inridge, the division commanders. 



41 Bragg's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:33; Polk to Bragg, Sept. 28, 1863, 
Ibid. :47 ; Hill's Report, Ibid. :140-41 ; Polk to Hill, Sept. 29, Ibid. :56 ; Polk to 
Hill, Sept. 30, 1863, Ibid. :62 ; Hill to Polk, Sept. 30, 1863, Ibid. :64 ; Cheatham 
to Polk, Sept. 29, 1863, Ibid. :63 ; depositions of Fisher, Lt. Col. T. M. Jack, 
Charvest, Perkins, Williams, and Captain J. Frank Wheless, Sept. 29 and 30, 
1863, Ibid. :57-62; Hill in B & L, 3:652-53; Polk, 2:261-62, 264; Comte de Paris, 
History of the CivilWarin America, 4 :137. Henceforth cited as Paris. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 229 

The troops formed, with Breckinridge on the right, 
overlooking the Federal left, Forrest's cavalry, which still 
looked to Bragg for orders, being on Breckinridge's right 
flank. Cleburne was in one line on the left of Breckin- 
ridge and Cheatham in two lines on Cleburne's left. W. 
H. T. Walker's small corps, of two divisions, was in re- 
serve in rear of Cleburne and Cheatham. It would have 
been better if Walker had had one division in the first 
line, with the other in reserve, as such an arrangement 
would have allowed Cleburne and Breckinridge each to 
draw back at least one brigade in reserve. This faulty- 
arrangement in one line was further aggravated by the 
movement of A. P. Stewart's division, of Longstreet's 
wing, across the whole front of Cheatham's division and 
encroaching on Cleburne's line of advance. On account 
of the thick undergrowth and because of fog and smoke, 
Cheatham did not discover Stewart's change of position 
until too late to have it rectified.^^ 

All through the night of the 19th the ringing of axes 
and other noises indicated that the Federals were doing 
what they could to throw up log breastworks and other- 
wise to strengthen their positions. An attack at dawn 
was expected,^^ but none came and it was 9.30 A. M. of the 
20th before Breckinridge began his advance. Cleburne 
followed about fifteen minutes later.^^ The four hours 
of daylight were not wasted by the Federals under 
Thomas. Everything possible was done to make ready 
for the expected attack, and the time was used to rectify 
faulty positions and to reconnoitre.^^ 

Breckinridge, moving rapidly forward and overlap- 
ping Thomas's left, was soon in possession of the road to 
Chattanooga, the Federal line of retreat, but his own left 

42 Hill's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:141-42; Polk to Bragg, Sept. 28, 1863. 
Ibid. :47: Polk, 2:268. 

43 Thomas's Report, O. R. 30, part 1:251; Paris, 4:136-37. 

44 Hill's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:141; Breckinridge's Report, Ibid. :198 ; 
Cleburne's Report, Ibid. :154. 

45 Thomas's Report, O. R. 30, part 1:251; Paris, 4:M8. 



230 Thomas Robson Hay 

brigade, under Helm, was bloodily checked, its command- 
er killed, and it had to fall back and re-form. His right 
brigade, finally checked and for lack of prompt support, 
after more than an hour of bloody fighting, also fell back 
to re-form. Hill's handling of Walker's Reserve Corps 
was neither particularly energetic nor effective. Per- 
haps, if these troops had been thrown in to support Helm, 
success might have been achieved at this point and 
Thomas's line broken. Instead, they were transferred to 
the right of Breckinridge's line, where they arrived too 
late to be of any use.^^ 

In connection with the handling of Walker's Reserve 
Corps, it is interesting to note in General Hill's report of 
the battle the statement that at 8 o'clock, when General 
Bragg arrived at Hill's headquarters, "the essential prep- 
arations for battle had not been made . . . and, in fact, 
could not be made without the presence of the command- 
er-in-chief. The position of the Yankees had not been 
reconnoitered. Our own line of battle had not been ad- 
justed, and part of it was at right angles to the rest. 
There was no cavalry on our flanks, and no orders had 
fixed the strength or position of the reserves." In fact, 
there seemed to be little organization and little conception 
of the actual state of affairs. Again the fact may be em- 
phasized that Hill, as corps commander and as an experi- 
enced officer, must have anticipated that the fighting 
would undoubtedly be renewed on the morrow (the 20th) . 
He might have taken the proper steps to insure that, on 
his part, at least, there would be no delay in being ready 
to move to the attack at an early hour. It does not appear 
that any effort was made by Hill, in person or through 
his subordinate commanders, to organize the "essential 
preparations for battle." Hill's line of battle was not 
"adjusted" so far as it was possible to do so and "... the 
strength and position of the reserves . . " was not "fixed." 

46 Breckinridge's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:199-200; Walker's Report, 
Ibid. :242. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 231 

The enemy's position had not been "reconnoitered." This 
lack of "essential preparations" is doubly strange when 
we consider the fact that Cleburne and Breckinridge, two 
of the most energetic officers in the army, were HilFs di- 
vision commanders and under his direct orders.^^^ 

So far as Walker's command was concerned, this offi- 
cer reported that he had orders from Polk, the wing com- 
mander, "to hold my Reserve Corps in readiness to sup- 
port the attack upon the enemy which would take place 
at daylight and to support Cheatham's division. I was 
on the ground at daylight ready for the attack. The at- 
tack was not made at that time and between 9 and 10 I 
was ordered, instead of supporting Cheatham, to support 
Hill's corps." Walker complained that his corps was 
"disposed of, brigades being sent in to take the place of 
divisions" in positions from which he "felt certain they 
would have to leave when they were sent in." He said 
that General Hill had "disintegrated" his Reserve Corps 
"by sending it in by detachments" instead of as a unit 
or in sufficient force to make itself felt by the enemy. 
Though Hill was the commander on the ground, it should 
be noted that Polk was present with Hill and could have 
countermanded Hill's orders had he believed them to be 
in error.^^b 

Cleburne's advance met with no more success than did 
Breckinridge's. He encountered a furious and deadly 
fire and the wooded ground prevented the use of his ar- 
tillery. The right and center brigades, after an obstinate 
contest, were compelled to fall back. The left brigade, 
under Deshler, came in contact with A. P. Stewart's over- 
lapping line and had to be taken out and moved to the 
right to connect with L. E. Polk's brigade, now the 
left of the division, in order to fill a gap made by the re- 



46a Hill's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:142. 

46b Ibid. ; Breckinridge's Report. Ibid. :199-200 ; Walker's Report, Ibid. 
:242. 



232 Thomas Robson Hay 

tirement of S. A. M. Wood's brigade. There were no 
braver troops than Cleburne's and there were no bolder 
and more resourceful leaders than Cleburne and his brig- 
ade commanders, but his troops could make no progress 
in the face of the deadly fire delivered from the Federal 
lines. Deshler was killed. After an hour of fighting 
Cleburne withdrew to re-form.^'^ 

The attack on the right, though mainly unsuccessful, 
had not been for nothing. Thomas was compelled to call 
frequently for re-enforcements, which were sent.^s In 
these movements on the Federal right, a hurried call for 
help, from one of the center brigades in the Federal line, 
caused the issuing of an order,^^ based on a misconception 
of the exact state of affairs, which opened a wide gap in 
the Federal right. Into this opening burst the storm of 
Longstreet's assault, Bushrod Johnson's division lead- 
ing.^o Taking the situation in at a glance, Johnson 
wheeled to the right, taking the Federals in flank and rear 
and driving them in precipitous retreat, Rosecrans and 
his staff being swept backward to Chattanooga with the 
fleeing mob. But at this supreme crisis, that staunch 
fighter and true soldier, George H. Thomas, stood firm 
and saved the Federal army. Attack followed attack and 
Thomas, though given discretionary orders to retire to 
Rossville," firmly held his ground. At points he was 
forced back, but nowhere could the gallant Confederates 
penetrate his line, though slowly, step by step, they 
pushed back the Federal line. 



47 Cleburne's Report, Ibid. :154-55. 

48 Rosecrans's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :58-59 ; Thomas's Report, Ibid. 
:252-53; Garfield to McCook, 10.10 a. m., Sept. 20, 1863, Ibid. :70 ; Garfield to 
Crittenden, 10.45 A. M., Sept. 20, 1863, Ibid. :71. 

49 Rosecrans to Wood, 10.45 A. M., Sept. 20, 1863, quoted in Wood's Re- 
port, Ibid. :635 ; Rosecrans's Report, Ibid. :59 ; Rosecrans to Lorenzo Thomas, 
Adj. Gen., U. S. Army. Jan. 31, 1864, Ibid. :102-5 ; H. M. Cist, Army of the 
Cumberland, 219-23. 

50 Johnson's Report, O. R. 80, part 2:457-58. 

51 Rosecrans to Thomas, 12.15 P. M. (4.15 P. M.), Sept. 20, 1863, O. R. 30, 
part 1 :140 ; Thomas's Report, Ibid. :253 ; Rosecrans to Thomas, Sept. 30, 1863, 
Ibid. :256 ; Thomas to Rosecrans, Oct. 3, 1863, Ibid. :257 ; Garfield to Rosecrans, 
8.45 P. M., Sept. 20, 1863, Ibid. :141. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 233 

At 3.30 p. M. Cleburne was ordered to move forward 
again from his position on the right, but the disorgan- 
ized condition of the troops and the necessity for a com- 
plete re-alignment of the right, delayed a forward move- 
ment until 4.30 P. M. Cleburne's right brigade, com- 
manded by General L. E. Polk, was checked, and the left 
and center brigades did not move aggressively on account 
of the formidable positions in their front. Later, Cle- 
burne again moved forward and after 6 o'clock, Polk's 
brigade occupied the trenches in his front.^^ Thomas, 
though re-enforced by Granger with one division, which 
had been marching to the sound of the firing, had made 
his preparations to withdraw^^ and, under cover of the 
rapidly descending darkness, his troops marched off 
through McFarland's Gap to positions, five miles to the 
rear, at the foot of Missionary Ridge and about Rossville. 

No pursuit followed. Bragg refused to believe that 
he had won a victory and, in his report, he stated that 
his supplies were so short that he waited until they could 
be replenished, before taking up the pursuit.^^ Although 
the men were tired and worn out from two days of march- 
ing and fighting, the moral enthusiasm of victory would 
have stimulated them to further efforts. Buckner, Cle- 
burne, and others urged an immediate pursuit.^^ Forrest, 
with his usual promptness and vigor, was early in the 
saddle on the morning of the 21st, and sent back word 
urging Bragg to hurry the infantry forward in pursuit, 
saying " . . . . every hour is worth a thousand."^^ 



52 Hill's Report. O. R. 30, part 2 :144 ; Cleburne's Report, Ibid. :156-57. 

53 Thomas's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :253 ; D. M. DuBose, General Joseph 
Wheeler and the Army of Tennessee, 196-97. Henceforth cited as DuBose. 

54 Polk, 2 :281 ; Bragg, in his report of the campaign, says : "The enemy, 
though driven from his line, still confronted us ... " and that he did not pursue 
because "any advance .... especially at night over ground so thickly wooded 
might have resulted in most serious consequences." (Bragg's Report, O, R. 30, 
part 2:34, 36.) 

55 Archibald Gracie, The Truth About Chickamauga, 37, 394. 

56 John A. Wyeth, Life of N. B. Forrest. Dr. Wyeth says he cannot 
verify this statement. Cf. also Jordan and Pryor, The Campaigns of Forrest's 
Cavalry, 350-51. 



234 Thomas Robson Hay 

Bragg's inaction was due largely to the lack of a clear 
conception of the actual state of affairs, caused by his 
absence from the battlefield and by his incredulity at the 
success of his troops. In not pursuing immediately, he 
violated his own dictum, expressed only eighteen months 
before, after Shiloh, "... to never, on a battlefield, lose 
a moment's time . . . but to press on with every available 
man.^^*^ All of his troops were not exhausted. One brig- 
ade, Humphrey's of Kershaw's division, had hardly been 
engaged.^^ Preston's division had been in reserve during 
most of the 20th.^3 Of Cheatham's five brigades, only 
Jackson's had been engaged before 6 P. M. of the 20th.6<^ 
C. C. Wilson's and Ector's brigades of Walker's Reserve 
Corps had been comparatively inactive.^^ General Mc- 
Laws was momentarily expected to arrive with his divi- 
sion, of four brigades, and Alexander's artillery of Long- 
street's command. McLaws's infantry actually came up 
on the 21st62 ^nd the artillery on the 25th.63 Longstreet, 
who, in the absence of Bragg, commanded on the field, 
says that "as it was almost dark, I ordered my line to 
remain as it was," at the close of the fighting on the 20th, 
and the troops to be got "in readiness for the pursuit in 
the morning, "6^ though General Preston had requested 
"permission to pursue the enemy by moonlight."^^ Cer- 
tainly all evidence points to the generally demoralized 
condition of the Federal forces and to the fact that many 
organizations had been broken up and scattered or taken 
prisoners, and that some were short of ammunition.^^ 



57 Bragg's Report, O. R. 10, part 1:470. 

58 Humphrey's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:509. 

59 Preston's Report, Ihid. :419. 

60 Cheatham's Report, Ihid. :79. 

61 C. C. Wilson's Report, Ihid. :249. 

62 Longstreet's Report, Ihid. :290 ; Longstreet, 462. 

63 Alexander, 449. 

64 Longstreet's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:289. 

65 Archibald Gracie, The Truth Ahout Chickamauga, 87, 394. 

66 Ibid. :60, 63, 64, 67flf— Gracie maintains that Thomas did not consider 
Rosecrans's order (12.15 P. M., Sept. 20, 1863, O. R. 30. part 1:140) as giving him 
discretionary authority in regard to retiring: Cf. footnote 51. For the condition 
of the Federal army, Cf. Rosecrans's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :59 ; Garfield to 
Rosecrans, 3.45 p. M., Sept. 20, 1863, Ibid. :141 ; Baird's Report, Ihid. :279 ; Neg- 
ley to Garfield, Oct. 9, 1863, Ihid. :335 ; Gracie, 99, 101 ; John Beatty, The Citizen 
Soldier, 345 ; P. H. Sheridan, Memoirs, 1 :284. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 235 

On the morning of the 21st the Federal army under 
Thomas was in position on Missionary Ridge. Here it 
awaited the expected attack, but there was no forward 
movement by the Conf ederates.^'^ Longstreet reports that 
he advised crossing the Tennessee River above Chat- 
tanooga and moving upon Rosecrans's communications. 
He understood that Bragg agreed to making this move 
and that he had ordered Polk's right wing to take the 
lead. Bragg denied ever having considered such a move.^^ 
Polk's corps began its advance on the afternoon of the 
21st, not to Chattanooga, however, but to occupy the high 
ground of Missionary Ridge, which overlooked the town.^^ 
On the night of the 21st, Thomas began his movement into 
Chattanooga and by morning of the 22nd his troops had 
occupied their assigned positions.'^° On the 23rd the Con- 
federate army was stretched in a semi-circle along the 
southeast front of Chattanooga, the left under Longstreet 
resting at the foot of Lookout Mountain, the right under 
Polk making connection with the Tennessee River above 
the town.'^^ The campaign and battle of Chickamauga was 
over and the Federal army was in a state of siege. 

COMMENTS 

The battle of Chickamauga was the high-water mark 
of Southern success in the West. The Confederate armies 
in this section had never before driven the opposing Fed- 
eral army, demoralized and broken, from the field of 
battle. The losses were the heaviest of the war for the 
forces engaged. Lincoln and Andrew Johnson, the Mili- 
tary Governor of Tennessee, were elated with the initial 
successes obtained by Rosecrans as a result of his skillful 
advance from Murfreesboro. At last the nerve-racking 
alternation of bright hopes and sickening disappoint- 

67 Alexander, 465 ; Thomas's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :254-55. 

68 Bragg's Report, O. R. 30, part 2 :37 ; Longstreet's Report, Ibid. :290 ; 
Alexander. 466. 

69 Cheatham's Report, O. R. 80, part 2:80. 

70 Thomas's Report, O. R. 30, part 1 :255. 

71 Polk, 2:283; Longstreet, 463. 



236 Thomas Robson Hay 

ments had seemed at an end. And then, without warn- 
ing, all these hopes were dashed to the ground. Most of 
what had been gained by the laborious efforts of the 
summer campaign was lost. The battle was acclaimed, 
throughout the South, as a brilliant victory. Bragg had 
checked Rosecrans's advance from Chattanooga, had as- 
sailed him on chosen ground, and driven him from the 
field, though not until after one of the bloodiest battles of 
history.'^2 gy^ h^q success was neither decisive nor final 
for the Confederate cause. The reasons for this were 
many and complicated, and not the least was Bragg's 
failure to immediately and vigorously pursue, or to adopt 
other measures than those actually decided on. It has 
been said that ". . . the elan of the Southern soldier was 
never seen after Chickamauga — that brilliant dash which 
had distinguished him was gone forever. . . . the failure 
to strike after the success was crushing to all his longings 
for an independent South. He fought stoutly to the last, 
but, after Chickamauga, with the sullenness of despair 
and without the enthusiasm of hope. That 'barren vic- 
tory' sealed the fate of the Southern Confederacy."''^ 

The story of the battle is but another tale of excellent 
fighting made in vain because of the inefficient handling 
of an army hastily brought together, poorly organized, 
and badly commanded. The force upon the field was am- 
ple to have reaped the full fruits of the victory so bloodily 
won, had its management been judicious.''^ The Confed- 
erate army, as constituted for the battle, was made up of 
an accretion of forces, strangers to each other and com- 
manded, in some instances, by officers who were strangers 
to each other and to their men. In the forces at Bragg's 
command were the army of Tennessee, W. H. T. Walker's 
and Breckinridge's troops just returned from Mississippi, 



72 Gordon, 212 ; C. R. Hall, Andrew Johnson, Military Governor of Ten- 
nessee, 101, 108. 

73 Hill in B & L, 3:662. 

74 Alexander, 450. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 237 

Buckner's command from East Tennessee, and Long- 
street's corps newly arrived from Virginia. Except for 
Longstreet's command, these troops had never gained a 
decided victory on a large scale. 

Hardee's absence was most severely felt. Exacting 
as a disciplinarian, he was reasonable and his judgment 
was sound. Perfectly cool, courageous, and calculating 
in victory or defeat, he was shrewd and quick to see his 
own advantage, and always hammered heavily on a dis- 
comfited foe. As a teacher, organizer, and leader he was 
second to none.'^^ Best of all, he commanded Bragg's con- 
fidence and respect. From his long experience he had de- 
veloped an equally quick perception and a ready adapt- 
ability, and was always prepared to meet emergencies 
and to assume the responsibilities of the position of corps 
commander with a completeness and an efficiency impos- 
sible to one a stranger to such duties. No doubt Bragg 
would have preferred to have detached someone else, in 
July, for the command in Mississippi, but the Richmond 
authorities viewed matters differently, perhaps largely 
in consequence of Hardee's reported actions after Perry- 
ville and again after Murfreesboro, and preferred to re- 
place him in his command in the Army of Tennessee.'^ ^ 

Bragg's relations with his subordinates were, gener- 
ally speaking, anything but cordial. Ill health still pur- 
sued him, as it had for some years past, making him in- 
creasingly more irritable. There was not that mutual 
confidence and trust that should always exist between a 
chief and his officers, if a victory is to be won. Frequent- 
ly, there seemed to be a disposition on Bragg's part to 
find a scapegoat for every failure and disaster. This feel- 
ing, which largely prevailed among the ranking officers 
of the army, made them cautious about striking a blow 



75 W. P. Johnston, Life of Albert Sidney Johnston, 354 ; Lee to Davis, 
July 12, 1864, Lee's Dispatches, 284 ; Davis to Hood, Aug. 5, 1864, O. R. 38, part 
5 :946. 

76 Polk, 2:225-26. 



238 Thomas Robson Hay 

or carrying out a desirable movement on their own initia- 
tive, when an opportunity presented itself, unless pro- 
tected by a positive order ."^"^ Such an attitude is in strange 
contrast to Lee's relations with his subordinates, a rela- 
tion at once friendly and courteous, though always as a 
commander to his lieutenants. 

This unfortunate attitude of Bragg's of always seem- 
ing to be looking for vicarious sacrifice to cover up his 
own errors and shortcomings, resulted in the arrest of 
Hindman, for his failure at Pigeon Mountain, on Septem- 
ber 10 and 11,'^^ and of Polk for his failure to attack Crit- 
tenden on the 13th and to order his troops forward at 
dawn of the 20thJ^ Hill was relieved of his command not 
only because of his failures on the 11th and 20th, but 
also because of his participation in the movement to se- 
cure the removal of General Bragg from the command of 
the army.^o (Qf this movement to dispose of Bragg we 
will speak in detail later.) Buckner^i and Forrest,^^ 
though promoted, were both transferred to other fields, 
the former after having been for some time on leave of 
absence. 

No one of the reliefs and transfers was particularly 
disastrous in its consequences, as the officers affected had 
vitiated their effectiveness as long as they served under 
Bragg, either by their attitude of personal criticism and 
petty fault finding, or by alleged disobedience of orders. 
But General HilFs case deserves more than passing notice, 
because of his rank, because he was new to the army, and 
because of his previous friendly personal and official re- 
lations with both President Davis and General Bragg. 

77 Hill in B & L, 3:646. 

78 "Charges and Specifications preferred against Major General T. C. 
Hindman," O. R. 30, part 2:310. 

79 "Charges preferred against Lt. Gen. L. Polk," O. R. 30, part 2:55-56. 

80 Special Orders, No. 33, Department of Tennessee, Oct. 15, 1863, Ibid. 
:149; Polk, 2:261, 262, 264; Hill in B & L, 3:652-53. 

81 Buckner to Cooper, May 2, 1864, O. R. 52, part 2:664. 

82 Bragg to Forrest, Sept. 28, 1863, O. R. 30, part 4:710; Davis to For- 
rest, Oct. 26, 1863, O. R. 31, part 3:603-4; Davis to Bragg, Oct. 29, 1863, Ibid. 
:603 ; DuBose 207. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 239 

This whole subject of General Hill's relief is a rather 
complicated one. On Oct. 11, 1863, Bragg wrote Davis : 
"With a view to the more efficient organization and com- 
mand of this army, I beg you will relieve Lieutenant-Gen- 
eral Hill from duty with it. Possessing some high quali- 
fications as a commander, he fails to such an extent in 
others more essential that he weakens the morale and 
military tone of his command.^^ A want of prompt con- 
formity to orders of great importance is the immediate 
cause of this application."^^ As soon as General Hill re- 
ceived the order relieving him of his command he asked 
for a Court of Inquiry, but this request was denied him.^^ 
At the time. Hill seemed to be of the impression it was 
the general belief that he was relieved for his delay in 
attacking on the morning of the 20th and he so wrote Mr. 
Seddon, the Secretary of War.^^ Seddon equivocally re- 
plied : "I trust you will not allow your equanimity to be 
disturbed by the idle scribbling of a newspaper corre- 
spondent. You can interpose the shield of your well- 
earned reputation to such petty assaults."^'^ General 
P. G. T. Beauregard's son wrote him from Tennessee, that 
General Hill had been relieved for "disobedience of or- 
ders" and that Bragg had told Davis when the matter 
of his (Bragg's) replacement in the command of the 
army was under consideration "that if he [Bragg] was 
retained where he was he would never countenance diso- 
bedience of or non-compliance with orders from any offi- 



83 This statement of Bragg's is not substantiated by contemporary evi- 
dence. Cf. letters to Hill from Cleburne, Breckinridge, L. E. Polk, Lowry, Long- 
street, and Clayton on hearing of his relief from his command, quoted in A. C. 
Avery, "Life & Character of Lieut. General D. H. Hill," Southern Historical So- 
ciety Papers, 21 :145-47. 

84 Bragg to Davis, Oct. 11, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2:148. The "immediate 
cause" was apparently Hill's conduct on the 20th, though it should be noted that 
Bragg's request is dated just after the time of the meeting of Davis, Bragg, 
and the generals of the army for consultation with regard to action to be taken 
in connection with the petition sent to President Davis requesting Bragg's re- 
moval from command of the army. 

85 Hill to Bragg, Oct. 16, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2 :149 ; Hill to Cooper, Nov. 
13, 1863, Ibid. :150 ; Cooper to Hill, Nov. 20, 1863, Ibid. :151. 

86 Hill to Seddon, enclosing "Army Correspondence", Charleston Courier. 
Oct. 26, 1863, Ibid. :151-52. 

87 Seddon to Hill, Dec. 1, 1863, Ibid. :153. 



240 Thomas Robson Hay 

cer, however high in position, regardless of conse- 
quences."^^ 

On November 17, 1863, President Davis wrote General 
Hill that he had not been relieved ''for expressing a want 
of confidence in General Bragg. That reason was not 
given to me in the note through which General Bragg 
recommended your removal and on which I authorized 
him to relieve you."^^ At the time, Davis wrote Bragg 
"regretting that the expectations which induced the as- 
signment of that gallant officer [Hill] to this army have 
not been realized" and authorized him to relieve General 
Hill.90 Hill understood from Bragg, howeyer, "that [he] 
had no fault to find with me up to the close of the battle 
of Chickamauga and you placed your removal on personal 
grounds. I learned that you made a similar statement 
through Senator Semmes [of Louisiana] to Senator Gra- 
ham [of North Carolina]." Hill closed his letter with 
the remark that "I must candidly tell you that I do not 
regret my course whilst connected with the Army of 
Tennessee. I acted solely from a sense of duty, and, with 
a full knowledge of all the suffering attendant on the act, 
would renew it again."^^ Bragg referred this letter of 
HilFs to President Davis, saying that Hill " . . . . can but 
know that the immediate cause of his removal by your- 
self was his own act, not mine.^^ Having taken active 
steps to procure my removal in a manner both unmilitary 
and unofficerlike .... he [Hill] was, at my request, trans- 
ferred from [the] army as a necessary consequence of the 
line of conduct he had pursued. . ."^^ Davis, in his en- 



88 A. N. T. Beauregard to P. G. T. Beauregard, Oct. 14, 1863, O. R. 30, 
part 3:746. 

89 O. R. 52, part 2:562. 

90 Davis to Bragg, dated "Near Chattanooga, Tenn.", Oct. 13, 1863, 
O. R. 30, part 2:149. 

91 Hill to Bragg, June 11, 1864, O. R. 52, part 2:677. 

92 Bragg seems to equivocate at this point if we consider his letter of 
Oct. 11, 1863, quoted in footnote 84. There would almost seem to have been two 
"immediate cause[s]". One "immediate cause" was Hill's conduct and leadership 
on the 20th ; the other was his participation in the movement to secure Bragg's re- 
moval and his alleged authorship of the petition. 

93 Endorsement, Bragg to Davis, June 16, 1864, O. R. 52, part 2:677. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 241 

dorsement, however, says: "The request you preferred 
that General Hill should be removed from your command 
for the reason it would conduce to the public interest was 
connected, in my mind, with events previously communi- 
cated [HilFs failures of September 11th and 20th?], some 
of which preceded the battle of Chickamauga and all of 
which taken in connection with the fact that he had been 
promoted and assigned to duty in the army under your 
command without previous service with [it] and without 
your recommendation formed in my mind a sufficient 
justification for your request. The attempt [by Hill?] to 
which you refer to have you removed, was not officially 
known to me, and, as rumored, involved many others, 
some of whom were not removed and none, so far as I 
was concerned, for that specific reason. . ."^^ "A want of 
prompt conformity to orders of great importance" togeth- 
er with an ineffective handling of the troops under his 
command was probably the "immediate cause" of Hill's 
relief, rather than the taking of "active steps to procure 
[Bragg's] removal." In his Report, dated December 
28, 1863, Bragg says that "the reasons assigned for this 
unfortunate delay [on the morning of the 20th] by the 
wing commander [Polk] appear in part in the reports of 
his subordinates. It is sufficient to say that they are 
entirely unsatisfactory." His comments on Hill's hand- 
ling of his troops were not particularly complimentary. 
He said that the troops of the right wing "were moved 
to the assault in detail and by detachments, unsupported, 
until nearly all parts of the right wing were in turn re- 
pulsed with heavy loss."^^ 

It will be noted from the foregoing comments that the 
testimony is at variance, particularly that of Bragg. Un- 
doubtedly the events of the campaign, especially those 
of September 11 and 20, only needed Hill's participation 

94 Endorsement, Davis to Bragg, June 17, 1864, Ibid. :677-78. 

95 Bragg's Report, O. R. 30, part 2:33. 



242 Thomas Robson Hay 

in the matter of the petition, mentioned later, to cause 
Bragg to ask for and Davis to approve of this officer^s 
relief from the army. Bragg, while later believing that 
he had asked for Hill's relief because of his participation 
in the matter of the petition to President Davis asking 
for Bragg's relief from command of the army, really 
made this request because of his dissatisfaction with the 
way Hill had handled his command. The petition simply 
focused the matter. This view seems to be borne out 
by a letter from Hill to Cooper, on February 23, 1864, in 
which Hill says that Bragg "in an interview with me dis- 
tinctly stated that he had no fault to find with me up to 
the close of the battle of Chickamauga ; he had used simi- 
lar language to officers of high rank in reference to me. 
Nevertheless, he did bring grave charges against me in a 
letter to the President. Nevertheless, extraordinary ef- 
forts were made to prejudice the army and the country 
against me. A Court of Inquiry, which would have vin- 
dicated my character and reputation has been persistent- 
ly refused me "^^ 

The whole matter of HilFs relief may, perhaps, be 
summed up as follows: "The merits of the controversy 
which cost General Hill his command we do not propose 
to determine . . . but we may safely risk the general re- 
mark that the penalty of relief from his command was 
out of proportion to his offense. His past record entitled 
him to consideration ; he had fought hard and done meri- 
torious service ; and it must have been exceedingly pain- 
ful to find himself reduced to a figure commanding State 
and local forces, and utterly lost to public attention in 
the last periods of the war.''^'^ Throughout the entire 

96 O. R. 53:312— C/. also O. R. 42, part 3:1163ff and O. R. 53:315, for 
correspondence regarding Hill's assignment to duty at Charleston, S. C, in 1864, 
and Hill's declination because of the unfair manner in which he felt he had 
been treated. He required "an unequivocal expression of undiminished confi- 
dence in [his] capacity, gallantry, and fidelity." (Hill to Cooper, Feb. 23, 1864, 
O. R. 53:313). This "expression" was not forthcoming, as Davis did not admit 
that these characteristics of Hill's conduct and services had ever been brought 
into question. 

97 E. A. Pollard, Lee & His Lieutenants, 455. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 243 

affair both Davis and Hill show to better advantage than 
does Bragg. 

In the printer of 1862-63, after the battle of Murf rees- 
boro, Bragg's principal subordinate commanders, in re- 
sponse to his written request for an expression of opin- 
ion, one and all advised him that he did not possess the 
confidence of the army.^s Now again, after the battle of 
Chickamauga, the same feeling of dissatisfaction became 
evident, manifesting itself, this time, in the form of a 
petition to President Davis asking for Bragg's removal 
from his command and stating that he had lost the con- 
fidence of the army. This petition, supposed to have been 
drawn by General Buckner,^^ ^^s signed by most of the 
general officers of the army. Some thought that General 
Hill was the author of this petition. In fact, some time 
after the close of the war, General Longstreet wrote that 
this petition "... was written by General D. H. Hill 
(he informed me since the war.")ioo in this statement, 
however, Longstreet's memory is certainly at fault, as 
was the case on other more important occasions. 
More reliable testimony is to the contrary. Major A. C. 
Avery, Inspector General and confidential aide on Gen- 
eral HilFs staff, who was afterward a Supreme Court 
Judge of North Carolina, in an article written in 1893, 
said: "... Buckner drew . . . and other Generals . . . 
signed and sent to the President a petition. . . . Hill was 
the last of the Lieutenant-Generals consulted, but, unfor- 
tunately for his future, his headquarters were located at 
a central point on the line and the paper was left there 
to be signed. Cheatham and Cleburne met at that point 
and put their names to the paper at the same time. . . . 
Hill cherished no unkind feeling toward Bragg . . . [but] 



98 O. R. 20, part 1:682-84 and 699-700. 

99 Petition to Jefferson Davis, Oct. 4, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2:65-66. The 
editor of the Official Records makes the notation, signed by W. M, Polk, a son 
of General Leonidas Polk, at the end of the petition : "Supposed to have been 
written by Buckner. Signed by Preston, Hill, Brown and others." 

100 Longstreet, 465. 



244 Thomas Robson Hay 

Mr. Davis was induced to believe that Hill was the orig- 
inator and most active promoter of the plan to get rid of 
Bragg as a chief, and both the President and General 
Bragg determined to visit the whole sin of the insubordi- 
nation of inferior officers of that army on him. . ."^o^ This 
is rather an extreme view of the hostility of Davis and 
Bragg for Hill. We have seen that Davis denied relieving 
Hill because of his participation in the matter of the 
petition. In fact, several years after the close of the 
war General Bragg wrote : " . . . General D. H. Hill's crit- 
ical, captious, and dictatorial manner . . . and his general 
deportment .... united to the fact . . . that Hill . . . count- 
ermanded [an] order, without notifying either Polk or 
myself, induced me to ask his suspension from command. 
..." In view of the fact that contemporary testimony is 
all to the contrary, it is rather strange that Bragg should 
continue this post-bellum statement with the unjust re- 
mark that General Hill "had . . . greatly demoralized the 

troops he commanded, and sacrificed thousands at Chick- 
amauga."^o2 

Though the majority of the officers signing the peti- 
tion cherished no ill feeling toward Bragg, they were 
unanimous in their conclusions that it was their duty to 
express their opinion, that Bragg should be replaced by 
one more suitable — ^temperamentally, physically, and 
otherwise — ^to command an active army in the field.^®' 
Longstreet wrote to the Secretary of War^^* and Polk to 
President Davis^^s j^ much the same tone. President 
Davis, perceiving the existing state of affairs, thought 
to assign Longstreet in Bragg's place, but this officer de- 



101 A. C. Avery, "Life & Character of Lt. Gen. D. H. Hill," Southern 
Historical Society Papers, 21 :143-44. 

102 Davis to Hill, Nov. 17, 1863, O. R. 52, part 2:562; Bragg to E. T. 
Sykes, Feb. 8, 1873, quoted in Polk, 2:296. 

108 Petition to Jefferson Davis, Oct. 4, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2:65; Buck, 
155 ; A. C. Avery, "Life & Character of Lt. Gen. D. H. Hill," Southern Historical 
Society Papers, 21:143-44. 

104 Longstreet to Seddon, Sept. 26, 1863, O. R. 30, part 4:706. 

105 Polk to Davis, Oct. 6, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2:67. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 245 

clined and suggested General J. E. Johnston.^oe Later the 
command was offered to General Hardee, who declined 
permanent assignment.^o'^ Finally, in desperation. Gen- 
eral Johnston was appointed^o^ and Bragg removed to 
Richmond as the President's military adviser. ^o^ 

On October 9, 1863, after having received the petition 
referred to. President Davis visited the army and, at 
headquarters, with Bragg himself present, he met the 
leading officers of the army to ask them their opinions of 
the fitness of the commanding general for his position. 
Notwithstanding the awkwardness of the situation for 
those present, the consensus of opinion was adverse to 
General Bragg and all agreed that he could be of greater 
service elsewhere. Among them, Cleburne, the Stonewall 
Jackson of the West, in his turn, tactful though he was 
and while recognizing Bragg's manifest abilities as an 
organizer and as a disciplinarian, was still of the opinion 
that Bragg had lost the confidence of the army and that, 
no matter how good a general he might be, this fact alone 
had destroyed his usefulness as a commander. It was 
his conviction that a change was absolutely necessary. 
Others were not so tactful in expression or considerate in 
demeanor. No written record of the conversations was 
kept."o 

No doubt had Bragg been left free, by the President, 
to follow his own inclination in the matter, he would vol- 
untarily have given up his command. Both before and 
after the battle of Murf reesboro, in anticipation of being 
relieved, he had expressed a willingness to stand aside 
and let a better man take his place, saying that wherever 
placed he would expect to do all in his power to promote 
the success of the common cause. This attitude of 



106 Longstreet, 466. 

107 Hardee to Cooper, Nov. 30, 1863, O. R. 31, part 3:765. 

108 Davis to Johnston, Dec. 16, 1868, Ibid. :835. 

109 Special Orders No. 23, Richmond, Va., Feb. 24, 1864. O. R. 32. part 
2:789. 

110 Longstreet. 465; Polk, 2:291; Buck, 155-56. 



246 Thomas Robson Hay 

Bragg's, in marked contrast to that of some of the other 
generals, naturally commended him to the government, 
which, viewing its own relations with Bragg, considered 
the requests for his relief as little more than insubordina- 
tion.iii Longstreet, on his part, did more injury than all 
the others put together. By his captious criticism and 
his invidious distinctions and unfair comparisons of 
Bragg with Lee, he was a powerful force in stirring up 
discord, not only among the officers, but also in the ranks. 
In fact, Lee was appealed to by both Longstreet and Polk 
to come to the army and assume the command.^^^ 

Bragg was patient under the criticism of his con- 
duct, but was unwilling to face the ill results of his own 
mismanagement. In spite of this fact he was, yet, un- 
selfishness itself in all matters relating to his private duty 
to the cause of the struggling South. "No man loved 
it better, no man gave it more devoted service, none sac- 
rificed his all upon its altar more ungrudgingly, no one 
would have laid down his life for it more cheerf ully."^^' 

One of the principal causes of failure in each of 
Bragg's campaigns, which were as brilliant in conception 
as they were faulty in execution, may, in the last analysis, 
be ascribed to his feeble health, which unfitted him to 
sustain long continued pressure of responsibility and gave 
rise to a bad temper, which marred all his relations with 
his subordinates and prevented that sympathetic and de- 
voted support which was always accredited Lee by his 
associates.^i^ 

On coming to the army. President Davis had brought 
with him General John C. Pemberton, lately exchanged 

111 Bragg to Davis, Nov. 24, 1862, O. R. 20, part 2:422; Bragg to Polk, 
Jan. 11, 1863, O. R. 20, part 1:699; Polk, 2:301-2. 

112 Lee to Longstreet, Sept. 25, 1863, O. R. 29, part 2 :749 ; Longstreet to 
Seddon, Sept. 26, 1863, O. R. 30, part 4:705; Polk to Lee, Sept. 27, 1863, Ibid. 
:708; Lee to Polk, Oct. 26, 1863, O. R. 30, part 2:69; Polk, 2:291; Longstreet. 
464-65. 

113 Bragg to Davis, Oct. 1, 1863, O. R. 52, part 2 :534 ; Davis to Bragg, 
Oct. 3, 1863, Ibid. :535 ; Bragg's Eeport, O. R. 30, part 2 :37 ; Bragg to Seddon, 
May 20, 1864. Ibid. :39 ; Bragg to Cooper, Oct. 3 and Oct. 6, 1863, O. R. 80, 
part 4 :726, 731 ; Polk, 2 :302. 

114 Richard Taylor, Destruction & Reconstruction, 99-101. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 247 

after his capture at Vicksburg, to assign him to the 
command of Polk's corps, but when the troops heard of 
the purpose, parts of the army were so near to mutiny 
that it was decided to recall General Hardee from Missis- 
sippi.^^^ 

On the Federal side some of the higher officers were 
subjected to much criticism, and the Washington authori- 
ties thought vindication important. Generals A. McD. 
McCook and T. L. Crittenden were relieved and went 
before a Court of Inquiry as did, also, General J. S. Neg- 
ley, commanding a division in Thomas's corps.^^^ In the 
middle of October General Rosecrans was relieved of his 
command and General Thomas assigned in his place.^^*^ 

A lack of knowledge of the exact location of the enemy 
and of his movements and a lack of personal supervision 
of the delivery and execution of important orders were 
among the primary causes of Bragg's failure, first, to beat 
his enemy in detail and then during and after the battle 
to follow up and make the most of successes on the field.^^^ 
It was this ability, as much as any other, that contributed 
so greatly to the successes of Stonewall Jackson. Bragg's 
daily experience in the handling of his army should have 
warned him that it was not a military machine that could 
be relied on to execute orders strictly or that would be 
alert to seize passing opportunities. By some the army 
was considered to be only one half as effective in attack 
as on the defensive. Another of the unfortunate features 
affecting the carrying out of the Confederate command- 



115 Cooper to Bragg. Oct. 4, 1863, O. R. 30, part 4:727; A. N. T. Beau- 
regard to P. G. T. Beauregard, Oct. 10 and 14, 1863, Ibid. :735, 746 ; Mackall to 
Johnston, Oct. 13, 1863, Ibid. :742-43 ; Longstreet, 469-70 ; General D. H. Hill wrote 

Oct. 26, 1863, probably to General J. C. Breckinridge, that " the plan 

was to give Pemberton the Corps [Hill's]. Polk's manliness and P's [Pember- 
ton's] sense of propriety defeated the scheme. Bragg's great object was to 
please the President and at the same time account to the country for his fail- 
ure. . . Pemberton declined [the command of the corps] when he found the 
division commanders adverse to him." (Historical Magazine, Feb., 1872, page 
19, quoted in Polk, 2:297) ; DuBose, 204. 

116 Records of McCook, Crittenden, and Negley Courts of Inquiry, all 
dated Jan. 9, 1864, O. R. 30, part 1 :930ff, 971ff, and 1004ff. 

117 Grant to Rosecrans and Thomas, Oct. 20, 1863. Ibid. :669. 

118 Hill in B & L. 3:641. 



248 Thomas Robson Hay 

er*s plans was a lack of an accurate knowledge and ap- 
preciation of the topographical features of the country in 
which the army operated, a deficiency shared in, not only 
by Bragg's subordinates, but by Bragg himself, who 
failed in a quick appreciation of features of this charac- 
ter.ii» 

Bragg's movements during the battle were uncertain 
and he could never be located when wanted. Consequent- 
ly, it was difficult for him to receive reports of the prog- 
ress of the battle. On the afternoon of the 20th, disturbed 
by the failure of his plan of battle and by the severe 
repulse of his right wing in the morning fighting, he 
seemed at a loss what to do.^20 Some considered that even 
as early as mid-afternoon of the 20th he thought the battle 
lost.121 In fact, as late as midnight of the 20th, Bragg 
refused to believe that his army had won a victory.^22 

The battle is unique in that neither commander of the 
opposing forces was on the field in the closing hours of 
the contest. Rosecrans had been swept into Chattanooga 
with the fugitives from his broken right and Bragg was 
resting in the rear of his line at Reed's Bridge. 

But we must look deeper than Bragg's own person- 
ality for his many difficulties and errors in management. 
They arose primarily from the lack of an adequate, effi- 
cient, and skilled staff. Even in the superior organization 
of Lee's army in Virginia the staff work was most defect- 
ive and left much to be desired. Bragg's army had far 
less opportunity to learn from experience, and many of 
the superior officers, though apt pupils and brave and 
courageous men, were not trained soldiers, with the in- 
itiative and genius for organization usually resulting 
from such training. An effective army is a vital organ- 
ism, in which each part responds, promptly and correctly, 

119 Alexander, 453. 

120 Longstreet, 452. 

121 Hill in B & L, 3:659. 

122 Polk, 2:251. 



Campaign and Battle of Chickamauga 249 

to the demands of the whole, an organism possible only 
to the extent that each officer and man understands his 
duties so thoroughly that he, unconsciously and under all 
conditions, does the correct and logical thing at the proper 
time. Such an army Bragg did not possess. Such an 
army is the product of technically trained experts and 
has for its ground-work, discipline and proper organiza- 
tion. 

The diverse make-up of Bragg's army, its poor organi- 
zation, and its division into two wings, at the end of the 
first day's battle, only served to aggravate the already 
serious lack of an efficient and competent staff.^^s The 
lack of a well organized body of independent scouts, not- 
withstanding the excellent cavalry commands, to furnish 
definite and precise information, led to the issuing of 
"impossible** orders, which subordinate officers, through 
sad experience, got in the way of disregarding. 124 Poor 
armament and equipment, as well as poor organization, 
were a further handicap. Only part of the artillery had 
been formed into battalions. Though there was not much 
opportunity in the battle for the effective use of this arm 
of the service, due to the heavy fogs and to the wooded 
character of the ground, its lack of proper organization 
and mobility and the inferiority of its ammunition, pre- 
vented even a reasonable degree of effectiveness in its use. 

Another feature of the battle was the peculiarity of its 
conduct. It was actually a series of battles. Each wing 
of the Confederate army fought independently and never 
simultaneously and in full force. As we have seen, the 
fighting on the first day was desultory from left to right 
and there was no general advance. For example, Cle- 
burne and Cheatham were sent in at 6 P. M., on the first 
day, too late to accomplish anything of consequence. On 
the 20th, Cleburne and Breckinridge were sent to the at- 
tack, in single line and without reserves, against an en- 

123 Afexander, 451-52; Paris, 4:136. 

124 HiU in B <fe L, 3:640, 644. 



250 Thomas Robson Hay 

emy fairly strongly and securely posted behind log breast- 
works. A bloody repulse followed and these troops were 
practically put out of action for the rest of the day. 
Other troops were sent in later and with no better re- 
sults. The entire morning of the 20th was thus con- 
sumed. The battle on the right over, the left had hardly 
been engaged. Shortly before noon the left wing made 
its attack. It advanced rapidly, found a gap in the en- 
emy's line, and drove oif three divisions, but was unable 
to break down the obstinate resistance of Thomas, secure- 
ly posted on the Horseshoe Ridge. Finally, just before 
dark, the two wings of the Confederate army were united 
and together drove the enemy from the field, though the 
rear guard, under Thomas, retreated in good order and 
only gave ground slowly. It is the old familiar story of 
piece-meal and un-coordinated attacks.125 

There does not seem to have been any reason for 
haste, on Bragg's part, in forcing a battle. Having failed 
to beat the Federals in detail, Bragg might better have 
taken up strong defensive positions and, by harassing cav- 
alry raids on Rosecrans's communications, forced Rose- 
crans to fight him on his own ground, starve, or retreat. 
Confederate re-enforcements of veteran troops v>^ere on 
the way and their arrival would have given Bragg a de- 
cisive numerical superiority had he but delayed a few 
days. Grant could not have come up in time to assist and 
Burnside was held at Knoxville. 

It is well recognized that the defensive role is usually 
the less hazardous and least costly. In this campaign, 
Rosecrans, although on the strategical offensive, gladly 
seized the tactical defensive when Bragg incautiously and 
unnecessarily gave him the privilege and the opportunity 
of doing so.^26 



125 Alexander, 452 ; Polk, 2 :296-98 ; Archer Anderson, "The Campaign and 
Battle of Chickamauga," Southern HiatoricaZ Society Papers, 9:388ff. 

126 Alexander, 453, 455. 



FRENCH INTRUSIONS AND INDIAN UPRISINGS 
IN GEORGIA AND SOUTH CAROLINA 

(1577-1580)1 
By Mary Ross 

University of California 
Berkeley, Cal. 

A Fourth French Intrusion. — Ribaut, Laudonniere, 
and Gourgues are three names that stand out in the story 
of the Franco-Spanish contest for the wide-spreading 
provinces of La Florida; but these French leaders were 
but trail blazers for a horde of adventurous spirits who 
coveted the South Atlantic seaboard. Scarcely a decade 
after the Gourgues attack a fourth French intrusion was 
launched against that Spanish borderland. This episode 
in Guale-Orista or Georgia-Carolina history has been 
hitherto all but unknown. Led by Nicolas Estrozi, from 
Bordeaux, and Gilberto Gil, a Catalan, a motley band of 
French corsairs moved northward out of the Caribbean, 
and between the years 1577 and 1580 entrenched them- 
selves in a third French fortification on the Atlantic coast, 
entered into a design with the Georgia-Carolina natives, 
and planned for the destruction of the Spanish establish- 
ments at San Agustin and Santa Elena (Port Royal) . Only 
the bravery of the Spanish forces at Santa Elena in the 
presidio of San Marcos and the clear-headed generalship 
and watchfulness of the Spanish governor, the renowned 



1 This paper is but a small chapter in the larger story that deals with 
Caribbean and La Florida history. It was begun in Professor Herbert E. Bol- 
ton's seminar in Spanish-American history at the University of California. The 
writer wishes to acknowledge her indebtedness to Professor Bolton, master of the 
Spanish Borderlands and historian of Greater America, for his generous assistance 
and inspiring enthusiasm. The study is based entirely on manuscript materials 
in the Archivo General de Indias, that inexhaustible source of information for 
the early history of America. All of the citations given are to transcripts in the 
Ross Collection. For aid in procuring these materials the author's thanks are 
due to Miss Irene A. Wright, of Seville, and to the foUowincr scholars who at 
times were Native Sons Travelling Fellows in History of the University of Cali- 
fornia: Dr. Lloyd Mecham, Columbia University; Dr. Arthur Alton, University 
of Michigan ; Mr. Ralph Kuykendall, Hawaiian Historical Commission ; Mr. Rol- 
land Vandegrift, University of Southern California; Mr. George P. Hammond, 
University of North Dakota. 



252 Mary Ross 

Pedro Menendez de Marques, saved the day for Spain and 
defeated the design for a French occupation of the coast. 

Franco-Spanish Rivalry, — Encompassing, the shores 
of La Florida's provinces formed the northern periphery 
of the Caribbean world and commanded the return route 
of the Spanish treasure fleets, homeward bound for Se- 
ville. Naturally, the innumerable harbors of that stra- 
tegic borderland attracted daring sea rovers, who, prey- 
ing on the commerce of the Western Indies, frequently 
sought rendezvous. Especially desirable were the island- 
guarded harbors of the Georgia-Carolina coast. 

As early as 1562 French rivalry for the goods of Spain 
had given rise to Ribaut's occupation of the long desired 
harbor of Santa Elena ; the failure of that enterprise had 
resulted in the establishment of a second stronghold base 
at Fort Caroline on San Juan River (St. Johns) . This 
second French intrusion had called Spain into fighting 
action and likewise occasioned the permanent Spanish oc- 
cupation of the Atlantic seaboard in 1565. Three years 
later another French aggressor descended upon La Flor- 
ida and demolished a small Spanish garrison at San Mateo 
(near Jacksonville) . The long-lived Franco-Spanish ri- 
valry for La Florida had begun. And, called into service 
on that frontier, Pedro Menendez de Aviles, Spain's great- 
est sea-conquistador, rallied his forces. Turning for as- 
sistance to his able nephew, Pedro Menendez de Marques, 
Aviles began his labors. La Florida must be pacified and 
the Bahama and Caribbean waters cleared of the Gallic 
scourge; but before the Adelantado could complete his 
conquests he was recalled to Spain, where unfortunately 
he died in 1574.2 

Marques was a worthy successor to the great Adelan- 
tado. From Havana to Axacan (Virginia) that experi- 
enced mariner kept the watch. Imbued with a con- 



2 For conditions in Florida at the death of Aviles see a report by Dr. 
Cdceres, Havana, November, 1574. {Archivo General de Indias, 54-2-2. Docu- 
mento no enumerado). 



French Intrusions 253 

suming zeal for service, he charted the Atlantic seaboard 
from Los Martilles (Florida Keys) to the Bahia de Santa 
Maria (Chesapeake Bay) . At the same time he strength- 
ened the fortresses in Cuba and La Florida and pushed 
forward the pacification of the Indians on the northern 
mainland. Upon his building the fate of the borderland 
hung. His most difficult problem was the defense of the 
coast against French and English corsairs. But intimate- 
ly connected with this task was that of checking Indian 
uprisings, events which were both cause and effect of the 
inroads of the foreign invaders. A sketch of the Indian 
revolt of 1576 is therefore essential to an understanding 
of the raids of Estrozi and Gil. 

The Indian Uprising in 1576. — Unlike the romantic 
conquistadores who chanced to find the ready-made wealth 
of the Aztecs and the Incas, the conquerors of La Florida 
were confronted by the manifold problem of competing 
with nature, with natives, and with foreign enemies. Life 
was not easy on the northern frontier. That "savage sel- 
vage of civilization" belied its floral appellation. No sil- 
ver-laden mule-trains made their way southward from 
the red hills of Chiaha (north Georgia) and Tama (cen- 
tral Georgia) across Guale's pine barrens and dense 
coastal plains to the sea ; nor did dazzling heaps of gold 
fill the royal coffers at San Agustin and Santa Elena. 
More often the very storerooms were bare of supplies, 
while hungry colonists and tall lean Creeks begged for 
grain. 

In contrast with the advanced tribes of New Spain, the 
La Florida natives, non-sedentary in their habits, were 
difficult to exploit. Their acorn caches were generally 
empty. Accordingly, any effort to levy tribute usually re- 
sulted in disaster. This was clearly illustrated in 1576 
when the commander at Santa Elena, in order to lessen 
the number of mouths to be fed, attempted to quarter 



254 Mary Ross 

troops with the nearby cacique of Escamacu, whose vil- 
lage was between Port Royal and Charleston. Twenty-one 
men under command of Lieutenant Moyano, well armed, 
were sent to visit the Indian neighbor. With lighted 
tapers and bared arquebuses Moyano entered the Oristan 
village, and without ceremony ordered his men to fall 
upon the Indians' food supply. Terrified, the women and 
children fled into the woods ; but, unperturbed, the crafty 
old cacique bided his time. Inviting the Spaniards to 
draw near, he innocently questioned the motive for their 
warlike attitude. Taken off his guard, Moyano allowed 
himself to be cajoled into putting out the lighted tapers. 
His arquebuses were now useless. And with a mighty 
warwhoop, the triumphant Indian summoned his tribes- 
men. In short order the howling braves put to death all 
but one of the trapped Spaniards. This one, a soldier 
named Calderon, had slipped away unnoticed during the 
parley, and after three days of hard travel through 
swamps and marshes reached Santa Elena with the evil 
tidings.3 

News of the Escamacu massacre spread southward. 
Sometime before that disaster Solis, the commander at 
Santa Elena, had unwisely interfered with a local quarrel 
in Guale, even going so far as to execute some of the 
Indian leaders who had put to death a fellow chieftain, 
who happened to be a Christian. That drastic step had 
aroused bitter feelings in Guale against the Spaniards, 
and now, linked with the hatred that had arisen in Crista, 
it caused disaffection among the natives along the entire 
Georgia-Carolina seaboard.^ 

Scarcely had Calderon returned to Santa Elena before 
the island was besieged by hostile natives. One day a 

3 Ynformacion sobre el levantamiento de los Indies de la Florida y per- 
dida del Fuerte de Santa Elena (A. G. I. 54-5-9. Simancas. Seculares, Audencia 
de Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de Governadores de la Florida vistos en 
el Consejo desde 1568 a 1611) ; Also, Bartolome Martinez a su magestad, Habana, 
Febrero 17, 1577 (A. G. I. 54-2-8. No enumerado). 

4 Diego de Velasco a su magestad, de la Habana, Enero 20, 1577 {A. G. I. 
64-2-2. Documento no enumerado). 



French Intrusions 255 

scouting party of nine Spaniards was sent out to recon- 
noiter. The distant sound of firearms was all that told 
their fate. In the meanwhile troubles in Quale had 
grown apace. When the royal officials from San Agustin, 
accompanied by a guard of soldiers, were on their way 
north in a launch with the annual pay chest, they were 
induced to stop and refresh themselves at Espogue, one 
of the Guale villages on the Inland Passage, or "via den- 
tro de los rios de Guale y Crista." Unsuspecting, the 
pleased Spaniards accepted the friendly invitation; but 
scarcely had they greeted their subtle hosts ere the entire 
delegation was set upon and brutally murdered. The pay 
chest and launch remained untouched and were recovered 
later on. 

Coming so soon after the Escamacu massacre, the 
Guale uprising left Santa Elena prostrate. She was com- 
pletely isolated, surrounded north and south by a horde 
of painted warriors bent on destruction. A prolonged 
siege meant ultimate disaster. San Agustin had re- 
sponded to the cry for help. Governor Miranda came 
with the supply ship, but, terrified by the presence of 
five hundred natives on the warpath, the widowed senoras 
implored the governor to abandon the establishment and 
take them to the capital. 

Unfortunately Marques was absent overseas. Philip 
II had called him to serve against the French enemy as 
Admiral of the Tierra Firme fleet. Havana, too, was out 
of touch ; and Miranda, desperate, with his forces reduced 
to fifteen or twenty young soldiers, gave the order for 
dismantlement. The heavier cannon were buried, but all 
movable goods, together with the people, were placed on 
board three vessels which were lying in the harbor. Lift- 
ing anchor, the Spanish boats drifted slowly down El 
Cano de San Felipe or Saint Philip's Creek. As the vessels 
waited for the tide the distant war chant of the trium- 



256 Mary Ross 

phant natives smote the air and marred with discordant 
note the quiet peacef ulness of that Carolina scene. Tear- 
ful, the unhappy colonists watched the slow curling 
wreaths of smoke rise above the darkening cedars, telling 
all too plainly the fate of those abandoned homes. Spain's 
flag was furled. Fort San Felipe was no more.^ 

Santa Elena Rebuilt. — But Santa Elena's call for help 
had reached the ears of her protector across the waters. 
Rallying to the cry, Philip II notified Marques and or- 
dered him back to La Florida. Marques was authorized 
to call upon Cristobal de Eraso, captain-general of the 
convoy for the treasure fleet, for equipment and men nec- 
essary for the rebuilding of the destroyed presidio. Cor- 
sairs were ravaging the Western Indies, but in June, 1577, 
Eraso generously responded to Marques' petition for aid, 
and furnished him with the Espiritu Santo, a staunch 
vessel, well armed and carrying forty men under the 
command of Captain Vicente Gonzales, experienced mar- 
iner on the Atlantic seaboard. Before the summer was 
far advanced Marques and Gonzales were on their way 
to Santa Elena, where they rebuilt the fort on a better 
site, changing its name to San Marcos. Near the black- 
ened ruins of the old settlement the Spanish standard was 
raised again ; and floating high above the gleaming can- 
nons of the new fortification, the proud banner of old 
Castile rose once more triumphant, all crimson and gold 
in the Carolina breeze, above the bristling ramparts of 
stern San Marcos.^ 



5 Ynformacion sobre el levantamiento de los Indios de la Flotrida y perdida 
del Fuerte de Santa Elena (A. G. I. 54-5-9) ; Baltasar del Castillo a su magestad, 
Habana, Enero 18, 1577 (A. G. 7. 54-2-3. No enumerado). 

6 The Council of the Indies to his Majesty, Madrid, March 20, 1577 (A. 
G. I. 140-7-33) ; Peticion que hizo Pedro Menendez Marques Almirante de la Ar- 
mada Real, sobre que se le den dos fragatas para la defensa de la Florida y 
construccion de fuertes (A. G. I. Simancas. Florida. Descubrimientos, descrip- 
ciones y poblaciones de la Florida. Patronato. 1-1- 1/9 N°. 26) ; Pedro Menen- 
dez Marques a su magestad, Habana, Junio 20, 1577 (A. G. I. 54-2-3. No enume- 
rado) ; Council of the Indies to his Majesty, Madrid, April 17, 1578 (A. G. /. 
140-7-33) ; Baltasar del Castillo y Ahedo a su Magestad. Havana, December 10, 
1577 (A. G. I. 54-2-3. No enumerado) ; Expediente sobre que el adelantado 
Pedro Menendez Marques fuese a la Florida al reparo y fortificacion del Castillo 
Santa Elena del que se habran apoderado y quemado los Yndios (A, G. I. Pat- 
ronato, 1-1- 1/19 No. 26.). 



French Intrusions 257 

The Corsairs in the Caribbean. — These Indian troubles 
were an incentive to foreign invasion. The news of La 
Florida's weakness spread over the seas. Her coasts were 
in imminent peril from French and English corsairs who 
despoiled the Spanish trade in the Caribbean waters. 
Countenanced by royal promoters, those lordly "Knights 
of the Main" plundered at will on every frontier zone. 
From San Lucar to the Azores and the Canaries, across 
the Atlantic to Guadalupe and Dominica, through the 
Caribbean Sea by way of Tobago to Cabo de la Vela and 
Cartagena, then onward to Porto Bello, Cape San An- 
tonio, Vera Cruz, and the more northern borders that 
skirted the Bahama Channel, the buccaneers trailed the 
route of the Spanish fleets.'^ And, if perchance the gods 
of war favored the Spaniards and kept the trade of the 
Indies from pillaging hands, the lusty sea-rovers, filled 
with chagrin at their failure to gather in great spoils, 
often found solace in the ruthless destruction of mainland 
peace and property. And now, in 1577, a fourth confed- 
eration of corsairs, probably cognizant of the absence of 
Marques from La Florida, and of the native uprising 
against Santa Elena, and all unsuspecting that Santa 
Elena had been rebuilt, moved northward out of the 
Caribbean and aroused anew Spanish defensive activities 
on the Atlantic mainland. 

News of French Vessel and Fort. — While rebuilding 
the destroyed fort of Santa Elena, information came to 
Marques through some Indians, of a French ship aground 
some leagues to the north and of a French fortification 
built nearby. One supposition was that the Frenchmen, 
searching for the harbor of Santa Elena, had been lost 
on the shoals off the coast of Crista and had later erected 
a fort near the place where their ship was wrecked. Again 
the conjecture was that the fort was not new, but had 

7 Francisco Carrefio a su magestad, Habana, Abril 13, 1578 (A. G. I. 54- 
1-15. No enumerado) ; Francisco Duarte & Francisco Carreiio. Fecha 2 de abril 
1578 (A. G. I. 54-1-15). 



258 Mary Ross 

served as a rendezvous on other occasions, when the 
French appear to have wintered on that more northern 
coast. Soon after the receipt of the first news of the 
enemy's presence, Marques had a second communication 
from the natives. This time the Indians told of the sur- 
prise of the French fort and of the enslavement of a hun- 
dred-odd Frenchmen found therein.^ 

Junco Sent to Spain. — ^Filled with concern over the 
French intrusion, and fearful of the evil influence of the 
enemy among the Indians, Marques, now governor, at 
once despatched Captain Rodrigo de Junco to Spain, in a 
tender, to seek aid and to give a full account of conditions 
to Philip II. Later the governor sent duplicate accounts 
to his Majesty by the despatch boat from New Spain and 
by a frigate direct from San Agustin. Thus by means of 
three distinct routes Marques endeavored to get news to 
the King. The despatch boat was captured at sea by the 
French, but Junco's vessel eventually reached Spain.^ 

In the meantime Marques, greatly alarmed, labored 
with feverish haste to make Santa Elena safe. One night, 
when the reconstruction of the fort was almost complete, 
sounds of cannon heard in the distance betrayed the pres- 
ence of the enemy and confirmed the alarm of the Span- 
iards. Fearful now of a wholesale onslaught all along 
the coast, and greatly concerned over the safety of the 
southern presidio, Marques hurried to San Agustin. He 
found everything quiet ; nevertheless, with precautionary 
foresight he strengthened the old fort and began plans 
for a new one. At the same time he called the nearby 
natives to a friendly conclave. 



8 liiigo Ruiz de Castrejana & su magestad, Habana, Diciembre 12, 1577 
(A. G. I. 54-2-3. No enumerado) ; Pedro Menendez Marques a su Magestad, Santa 
Elena, Octubre 21, 1577 (A. G. I. 54-5-16. Documento No. 17). 

9 Carta a S. M. de Pedro Menendez Marque dando cuenta del encuentro 
que tuvo con varios Yndios (A. G. I. 54-5-9. Simancas. Seculares. Audencla de 
Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de Gobernadores de la Florida vistos en el 
Consejo desde 1568 a 1611) ; Council of the Indies to his Majesty, February 25, 
1578; same to same, March 12, 1578 (both in A. G. I. 140-7-33). 



French Intrusions 259 

The Indian Council in Quale, — It was now the spring 
of 1578. La Florida faced another crisis, for dangers 
confronted every border. Marques must act quickly if 
he would save his province from annihilation at the hands 
of piratical Frenchmen allied with rebellious tribesmen. 
From the Indians at San Agustin he learned that a 
French design was under way to involve the entire sea- 
board in an uprising. Insidious scheming of the corsairs 
among the tribes in Orista and Guale had developed into 
a war council. Delegates from this conference had ap- 
proached the natives of San Agustin during the absence 
of Marques at Santa Elena, and only the faithfulness of 
the local Indians had prevented a wholesale attack upon 
the southern presidio. 

Learning that the council was still in session in Guale, 
the governor sent a relative to treat with the insurgent 
caciques, to induce them to deliver the captive Frenchmen 
and to make war upon the chieftain who had massacred 
the royal officials at Espogue two years before. The Guale 
chieftains agreed to both demands of Marques; but in 
the end they failed to give up the Frenchmen, although 
they did make war on Espogue and slay her leader.^o 

Marques Expedition to Guale. — Not satisfied with 
these results. Marques made his way up the coast to Guale, 
taking with him two launches and twenty men. For lack 
of soldiers this was the best he could do, since, to quote his 
own statement, "In case I should wish to take out fifty 
men there would not be left in any port more than forty, 
for there are always some sick and some clerics and 
friars." 

From a friendly Indian in Guale Marques learned that 
the French numbered over a hundred, and were divided 
among the various caciques, the head one of whom had 



10 Pedro Menendez Marques a bu Magestad. San Agustin, Junio 15, 1578 
(A. G. I. 54-5-16. Documento No. 20). 



260 Mary Ross 

forty captives. This Indian likewise said that the French- 
men were endeavoring to dispel the natives* trust in the 
Spaniards, going so far as to offer to lead the Indians in 
their hostilities. Marques, unable for lack of men to use 
force, resorted to a mild threat, sending to the Frenchmen 
word to leave the country, for if not he "would send men 
to look for them." The Frenchmen naively, but no doubt 
truthfully, replied that they did not wish to come out, 
"because they would immediately be hanged." The mem- 
ory of the fate of Ribaut's stranded crew was evidently 
still f resh.ii 

Disturbances at Santa Elena. — Seeing that nothing 
could be accomplished in Guale with so small a force. 
Marques made his way northward to Santa Elena. It 
was now April or early May, the fateful season in Santa 
Elena's story when the Orista natives sallied forth to 
make their attacks. According to the governor, the In- 
dians "came to the island many times, but did not dare 
to show themselves (although I tried some stratagems) 
excepting a few who finally came out, and when we went 
towards them drew off into the woods, for they are like 
deer." 

Late one afternoon, just as the sun sank behind the 
distant pine-edged horizon, a strange vessel dropped an- 
chor off the bar of Santa Elena. No doubt that Carolina 
evening was all aglow with riotous crimson and gold that 
set the western world afire, flung a flaming, complement- 
ary, purple storm-challenge out to the sea, and silhouetted 
with knife-edged precision the anchored ship against the 
eastern sky. There was little sleep at Santa Elena that 
night. All through the long hours the watch was kept, 
for Marques, fearful lest the stranger at the harbor en- 
trance might prove to be the enemy intent upon the res- 
cue of the stranded Frenchmen, dared not relax his vigil. 



11 Pedro Menendez Marques & su Magestad. San Agustin, Junio 15, 1578 
{A. G. I. 54-5-16. Documento No. 20). 



French Intrusions 261 

Added to this fear of the "stranger at the gate" was that 
of the terrific storm that broke above the fort that night 
and turned the whole firmament into a watery world, 
lashed into whitened fury the surging tide, and blinded 
with terror those who kept the watch. By morning the 
outworn wind had passed, and with it the strange ship. 
Marques waited several days for the reappearance of the 
vessel, but obtained no further sight of her. Then, fear- 
ful again for the safety of the southern presidio, he de- 
parted for San Agustin. Constant supervision of the 
seaboard was now imperative. No laxity could be permit- 
ted if La Florida was to be saved. 

Eight days after the arrival of Marques at San Agus- 
tin two corsairing craft, "one large and the other small," 
appeared off the bar, but withdrew when they perceived 
the artillery of the fort. Again the coast must be run, and 
Marques at once despatched two launches to Santa Elena 
to report the anchorage place of the intruders if they 
should be found attempting to communicate with the 
Frenchmen in the interior. 

Discovery of the French Fort — The returning launch- 
es brought no news of the French corsairs. But lest the 
enemy should escape from the Indians and leave the 
country with information that would be damaging to La 
Florida's welfare. Marques decided to find out for him- 
self where the French were fortified when taken by the 
natives, and to use every effort to frustrate any plan of 
theirs to get away. 

Repairing to Santa Elena, the governor thoroughly 
examined the entire territory. His persevering search 
was finally rewarded. In a wood near a river north of 
Santa Elena he found the French fortification. Judging 
by the plan of it there must have been a large force con- 
centrated there during its construction. The fort was 
triangular in form, and from bastion to bastion it meas- 



262 Mary Ross 

ured sixty-six paces, or something like two hundred feet. 
Built of small logs and mud, with curtain walls of heavy- 
timber, the fortified enclosure contained five houses. The 
structure was deserted, but Marques noted the presence 
of a bronze cannon weighing as much as two quintals, 
the bones of many dead persons, and the body of a hanged 
man — all indicative of a murderous surprise attack. The 
body suspended from the scaffold was later identified as 
that of a Spaniard. With characteristic thoroughness 
Marques burned the houses and demolished the fortifi- 
cation.^ 

Flores* Inspection of Santa Elena, — ha Florida was 
now in the limelight. The strategic position of that fron- 
tier had to be securely defended, and in October, 1578, 
the royal inspector. Captain Alvaro Flores, arrived at 
San Agustin to make an investigation of the two presidios. 
Fortunately we have his detailed description of both gar- 
risons. The new fort at Santa Elena (Port Royal) had 
just been completed by Marques. It was now referred to 
as Fort San Marcos. Being situated not far from the 
site of old Fort San Felipe, it commanded the surround- 
ing region. Manned by ten cannons of varying weights, 
its guarded entrance and frowning platforms convinced 
Flores that it was ready for action. But to be sure that 
all was well with that important establishment, Flores 
made a second inspection on November 1, after the ar- 
rival of fresh troops and new supplies. He found every- 
thing in perfect order. Each time the weights and meas- 
ures were tested to avoid any short rationing, and even 
the beds of the soldiers were examined to assure their 
comfort. Besides the artillery the weapons of the sol- 
diers were the arquebus, musket, sword, javelin, lance, 
and pike. Upon the platform the sentry box was equipped 

12 Pedro Menendez Marques a su Magestad, San Agustin, Junio 15, 1578 
(A. G. I. 54-5-16. Documento No. 20). An excellent discussion of corsairing 
activities in the Caribbean at a little later period is contained in Miss Irene A. 
Wright's "Rescates: With Special Reference to Cuba, 1599-1610" (Hispanic Amer- 
ican Historical Review, III, no. 3, August, 1920). 



French Intrusions 263 

with a bell with which to sound quarters, and other para- 
phernalia for emergency. Under command of Captain 
Quiros, supported by seventy-seven sturdy Spaniards, San 
Marcos bade defiance to Indians and French alike. She 
stood guard ready to dispute all who challenged Spain's 
sway on the Carolina border.^^ 

Efforts to Pacify Cayagua. — Yet Marques was trou- 
bled. At first he had hoped that the Indians would tire 
of the French and put an end to them, but the continued 
rebellious attitude of the Guale and Crista natives dis- 
pelled this illusion. So, when the time came in 1579 to 
take the pay to the soldiers at Santa Elena, Marques de- 
cided to make a strenuous effort to put an end to the dis- 
turbance. His forces were limited, but his will was 
mighty. The year before, Marques had petitioned the 
king for the right to make war upon the rebels ; but he 
probably had received little support from Philip II, whose 
recent Ordinance of 1573 had so zealously sought to pro- 
tect the Indians of America from unnecessary slaughter 
and extermination. 

It therefore appears that Marques' first plan was for 
the renewal of peaceful relations with the natives fifteen 
leagues north of Santa Elena. This scheme would involve 
the pacification of the pueblos under the jurisdiction of 
the cacique of Cayagua (Charleston), and if successful 
would no doubt establish a powerful ally to the north of 
Crista. This would forestall any French designs in the 
province of Chicora. At the same time it would furnish 
for the Spaniards native allies who would act as a north- 
ern support, and prevent French occupation of the splen- 
did harbor of Cayagua. Incidentally it would inhibit their 
trade with the interior natives, and help to keep the peace 
in the province of Crista. 



13 A report by Captain Alvaro Flores of his inspection of San Agustin 
and Santa Elena, in October and November. 1578 (A. G. I. 2-5-2/10). 



264 Mary Ross 

In the endeavor to establish this alliance. Marques 
resorted to formal diplomatic procedure. From Santa 
Elena he first sent a messenger to the cacique of the north- 
ern settlements, inviting them to a conference. The 
caciques refused to receive the Spanish representative; 
thereupon Marques despatched a more formal and im- 
pressive delegation, composed of a dozen members, to 
confer with the obdurate Indians. But once more the 
natives refused to parley. From their boat the Spaniards 
persisted in their friendly overtures, only to be greeted 
by a shower of arrows aimed by the natives on shore. 
There was nothing to do but return to Santa Elena and 
report their failure to Marques. Undaunted, the govern- 
or sent a third delegation to negotiate with the unfriendly 
chieftains. This time Marques, hoping that numbers 
might have a more telling influence, sent twenty men in a 
batel, or large bateau, to urge peace upon the natives. 
Again the natives refused to have anything to do with 
the Spaniards, going so far as to wound five of Marques' 
men. These indignities could not go unpunished. Con- 
vinced now that the French evil had gone further than 
he had at first supposed, and conscious that the demoral- 
izing influence must be eradicated, Marques decided to 
personally seek out the offending Frenchmen.^^ 

The Capture of the Frenchmen. — Reducing Santa 
Elena to minimum strength, Marques hurried northward 
with sixty men to put an end to the defiance of the re- 
bellious natives and to ferret out the Frenchmen. Little 
realizing the full strength of the Indians, the Spaniards 
boldly went ashore. They were under fire at once. The 
natives put up a brave defensive, and wounded fourteen 
Spaniards before Marques could recover ground and put 
the Indians to flight, leaving many of their dead upon the 
ground. 

14 Pedro Menendez Marques al presidente de la Audiencia de la Espanola, 
San Agustin, Abril 3, 1579 (A. G. I. 54-3-19. No enumerado) ; Antonio Martinez 
Carvajal a su magestad, Habana, Noviembre 3, 1579 {A. G. I. 54-2-3. No enu- 
merado). 



French Intrusions 265 

Action must now come quickly. Hurrying back to 
Santa Elena, Marques replenished his supplies; and be- 
fore the natives could spread the warning news to other 
pueblos and organize a general uprising, he turned back 
to strike at the large island town of Cocapoy, strategical- 
ly situated on a rise of ground, surrounded by open 
marshland, that commanded all avenues of attack. With 
muffled oars the Spaniards stealthily crept upon the sleep- 
ing town. At midnight the blow fell. The slaughter was 
fearful. Forty Indians were burned alive. Several 
Frenchmen were seized, and with them were captured the 
chieftain's son, wife, sister, and mother. Returning with 
his captives to Santa Elena by way of the destroyed 
French fort. Marques learned of twelve other Frenchmen 
left behind at Cocapoy. Among these was a pilot who 
had evidently been held captive by the Spaniards and had 
run away from them seven years before. After much 
parleying Marques was able to exchange his Indian 
women prisoners for the twelve Frenchmen, but he kept 
the son of the cacique of Cocapoy as a hostage. Satis- 
fied that the northern frontier was for the moment sub- 
dued. Marques deposited his captives at Santa Elena and 
then moved southward to crush the French in Quale. 

In the central province the natives were more friend- 
ly. Without any apparent discord or struggle the caciques 
of Quale immediately gathered in conference with Mar- 
ques and renewed their oaths of allegiance to the King 
of Spain. Then, gathering together their French prison- 
ers, except two boys and a soldier who were far away in 
the interior, they turned them over to the governor. 
Among those delivered was the captain of the band, 
Nicolas Estrozi. Marques had won the capital prize. 
With his prisoners well under guard he made his way 
back to San Agustin, sent to Santa Elena for the captive 
Frenchmen there, and subjected them all to trial. 



266 Mary Ross 

From the evidence submitted it was learned that Cap- 
tain Estrozi was a Florentine of noble birth, and a man 
of wealth, for he offered three thousand ducats as a ran- 
som if Marques would spare his life. However, to Mar- 
ques it did not seem wise or good for the service of his 
Majesty that such a man should return to France. Not 
only had the Frenchman conspired with the natives for 
the destruction of the Spaniards in La Florida, but he 
had also conducted extensive raids in the Caribbean, hav- 
ing "sacked and burned Margarita, Cumana, Guadianilla, 
and other towns, and taken many ships." In view of the 
above depredations, Marques decided that leniency was 
out of order and condemned to death twenty-three of the 
Frenchmen. Of the band captured only five were permit- 
ted to live, these being "three boys, a barber, and a Lom- 
bard soldier, who are needed in that province as inter- 
preters."^^ 

The Situation in 1580. — The new year (1580) opened 
with a more hopeful outlook. The fortification at San 
Mateo had been dismantled on account of lack of food 
and of men, but the forts at San Agustin and Santa Elena 
were in good repair; the immediate French menace had 
been eradicated ; Guale was friendly ; Crista and Cayagua 
had felt the weight of Marques' authority ; the Peninsula 
provinces were quiet ; and around San Agustin the labors 
of the Franciscan friars were beginning to bear fruit. 
For these constructive achievements Marques was re- 
sponsible, and Philip II in grateful appreciation endorsed 
the governor's acts. 

The Admiral was eager to resume his sea activities. 
So serious had become the devastations of the corsairs 
that a "rule was laid down in 1579 that no ship might 
enter or leave a port in the Indies under cover of dark- 
is Carta a S. M. de Pedro Menendez Marques dando cuenta del encuentro 
que tuvo con Varies Yndios (A. G. I. 54-5-9. Simancas. Seculares. Audiencia 
de Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de Gobernadores de la Florida Vistos 
en el Consejo desde 1568 i 1611). 



French Intrusions 267 

ness, without risk of being fired on by the forts." The 
constant inroads of the corsairs upon Spanish property 
had demoralized the sailing schedule of the fleets. Regu- 
lar schedules were diflicult to maintain. Variations ap- 
pear most frequent after 1580, and different causes have 
been given in explanation; among those cited being un- 
avoidable geographic and economic agencies, and the "in- 
curable dilatoriness of the Spaniards." This charge 
seems unwarranted. So far as the executive ability of the 
Admiral of the Tierra Firme fleet was concerned during 
those years of confusion, there is no room for anything 
but praise. Marques was completely occupied with the 
stupendous problem of guarding the provinces of La Flor- 
ida against the piratical attacks of French corsairs, whose 
organized raids affected the entire Caribbean world. At 
the same time, the captain-general of the fleet, Cristobal 
de Eraso, and his lieutenant Miguel de Eraso, labored to 
protect the trade of the Indies. From the Caribbean to 
the Azores the sea-paths were menaced. Added to the 
French attacks were those of other nationalities. The 
days of Drake and his sea-dogs were now at hand, and 
both Atlantic and Pacific borders were filled with appre- 
hension and misgivings. A maintained schedule for the 
Spanish fleets would have been superhuman.^^ 

Marques Reconnoiters the Coast, — Before planning to 
leave La Florida, Marques proceeded to reconnoiter the 
Georgia-Carolina seaboard once more, for disquieting 
news had again come from the interior. Going north 
to Santa Elena, the governor learned of other Frenchmen 
in that land. They must be removed quickly. Already 
they had penetrated beyond the mountains, one hundred 
and twenty leagues northwestward of Santa Elena, it was 

16 For an excellent account of the difficulties of the Spanish galleons with 
corsairs in the Caribbean, see Clarence Henry Haring, Trade and Navigation Be- 
tween Spain and the Indies in the Time of the Hapsburgs, chapters IX-X. 



268 Mary Ross 

reported. So, turning to his Indians for help, by persua- 
sion and threat Marques induced them to seek out the 
intruders. Four Frenchmen were finally delivered at 
Santa Elena. They proved to be Captain Roque, the com- 
mander of Nicolas Estrozi*s lost ship, El Principe, and 
three young sailors. 

Greatly impressed by the youthful Roque, Marques 
regretfully pronounced the death sentence. Warlike and 
brave, the twenty-eight year old mariner touched the 
heart of the older seaman ; but in dutiful compliance with 
the needs of his country the governor obeyed orders. 
Young Roque and his companions, knowing the weak- 
nesses of La Florida's fortifications, were dangerous to 
harbor, with a chance of escape. So, laconically Marques 
reported to his Majesty, "I killed the Frenchmen." News 
of others in the interior came also to Marques, but they 
could not be reached. 

While he strengthened San Marcos, Marques did not 
overlook the town nearby. Past experience had taught 
the Spaniards to prepare against Indian attacks, and the 
governor's report reveals the defensive steps taken by 
that frontier settlement. He wrote : "This town is pros- 
pering very well, and, as things are now, every house is 
a fortress against the Indians, because they are all of 
wood and clay, and are plastered outside and in with 
lime, and have their roofs of lime, which is good. As we 
have hit upon making lime of oyster shells, they are 
building their houses so that the Indians have lost their 
boldness. There are more than sixty houses here, of 
which thirty-one are of the kind which I have described 



French Intrusions 269 

to your Majesty." Quite a settlement was that on Parris 
Island in 1580." 

Satisfied that Santa Elena was safe, Marques returned 
to the southern presidio, probably arriving there on Eas- 
ter Sunday. The natives at San Agustin at once notified 
Marques that they had news of two men held captive by 
some Indian chieftains thirty leagues down the Penin- 
sula. These later turned out to be interpreters placed 
by Aviles with those Indians some years before. In the 
meantime the Indians had rebelled and taken the young 
Spaniards captive. Not knowing this, and fearing the 
presence of other intruders, Marques with thirty men 
made his way down the coast in two launches. The shore- 
line was run from San Agustin to Los Martilles. Reas- 
sured that the Peninsula provinces were safe, Marques 
repaired to Havana to seek monetary aid from Governor 
Luxan. Pay for the soldiers had been delayed. But the 
obdurate Cuban governor adhered strictly to the red tape 
of official machinery and, blustering, refused to acquiesce 
in the request of Marques without going through certain 
lengthy legal proceedings, "even though seven Floridas 



17 Pedro Menendez Marques to his Majesty, Santa Elena, March 25, 1580 
(A. G. I. 54-5-9. Documento No. 12). The ruins of this fort and settlement were 
described in some detail by William Hilton in 1663 ("A True Relation of a Voy- 
age upon discovery of part of the coast of Florida," etc. South Carolina Histor- 
ical Society Papers, Vol. V, pp. 20-21) : — "That which we noted there, was a 
fair house builded in the shape of a Dove-house, round, two hundred foot at 
least, compleatly covered with Palmeta-lea.ves, the wal-plate being twelve foot 
high, or thereabouts, & within lodging rooms and forms ; two pillars at the 
entrance of a high Seat above all the rest ; Also another house like a Sentinel- 
house, floored ten foot high with planks, fastened with Spikes and Nayls, stand- 
ing upon Substantial Posts, with several other small houses round about. Also we 
saw many planks, to the quantity of three thousand foot or thereabouts, with 
other Timber squared, and a Cross before the great house. Likewise we saw the 
Ruines of an old Fort, compassing more than half an acre of land within the 
Trenches, which we supposed to be Charls's Fort, built, and so called by the 
French in 1562 &c." What he described was clearly the Spanish fort, not the 
French. 



270 Mary Ross 

should be lost." On May 18 Marques left Havana for 
La Florida.i8 

Gil on the Coast, — The reconnoissance of the La Flor- 
ida seaboard had been most opportune. According to 
friendly arrangements with the Guale natives, a Spanish 
soldier was stationed in that province. By means of 
Indian runners this soldier was able to keep Santa Elena 
acquainted with happenings in Guale. Further south- 
ward at San Mateo the natives were likewise friendly 
and kept San Agustin in touch with that harbor. 

The governor needed the loyal support of his native 
allies, for scarcely had he returned to San Agustin when 
the provinces were again the scenes of French designs. 
This time the menace took on the nature of a confedera- 
tion whose overtures, if not quickly offset, would have 
won the alliance of the Guale chieftains and established 
so formidable a wedge between Santa Elena and San 
Agustin, that the existence of both presidios would have 
been jeopardized. 

The blow fell in mid-summer. At three o*clock in the 
afternoon of July 18, while the governor was in confer- 
ence with his soldiers at San Agustin, the door of the 
guard room was suddenly thrown open and the conclave 
interrupted by a panting, sweating, incoherent native 
from San Mateo. Marques, startled, hurriedly called 
Contreras, the interpreter, and through him learned of 
the presence of a French ship with a launch in the har- 
bor, twelve leagues to the north. The Frenchman had 
arrived on the 17th bringing many boxes and much cloth- 
ing for trade with the Indians. When the corsair in- 
quired about the strength of San Agustin, the Indian had 
given a very disparaging account of that presidio, hoping 

18 Carta del Gor Po Menendez Marques y de la hauna. es de Mayo 15 
de 1580 {A. G. I. 54-5-9. Simancas. Seculares. Audiencia de Sto Domingo. 
Cartas y expedientes de Gobernadores de la Florida, vistos en el Consejo desde 
1568 a 1611) ; Pedro Menendez Marques a su majestad, Habana, May 11, 1580 
(A. G. I. 54-5-16. Doc. No. 22). 



French Intrusions 271 

thereby to entice the Frenchmen ashore and despoil them 
of their ships and goods. 

Perhaps there flashed through the Governor's mind 
the picture of Ribaut and Fort Caroline, and of Gour- 
gues' revenge. Marques was now all action. Calling 
Manuel Alvarez, he sent him on a horse to ride without 
delay to the outskirts of San Mateo and there, unobserved, 
at daybreak, to note the ship, its size, crew, and apparent 
intent. By nightfall on the 19th Alvarez was back at 
the presidio with news of "a new Galeaceta of two top- 
sails, of eighty or ninety tons' burden, with probably fifty 
men, more or less" on deck. 

Marques had two frigates at San Agustin ; one belong- 
ing to his Majesty, the other the property of Yfiigo Ruiz, 
collector of the allowance; both vessels were dismantled 
and dismasted. But that night master, pilot, crew, sol- 
diers, and governor labored to get them into readiness. 
By eight o'clock the next morning artillery and supplies 
were all aboard. Without waiting to consult his Majesty's 
local officials, much to their disapproval. Marques turned 
the government over to his brother-in-law, Juan de Posa- 
da, who was filling the office of factor.^^ Then, calling 
upon Captain Quiros to man one of the frigates. Marques 
boarded the other. With fifty sailors and three pieces of 
artillery, the two frigates sailed for San Mateo. 

The Fight at San Mateo. — Three hours before night- 
fall on the same day (the 20th) Marques crossed the bar 
at San Mateo. In the distance, among the sand bars, lay 
the French ship, ready to come out. But the governor 
took no chances on her escape with that night's tide. 
Marques and Quiros closed in on the corsair, and the 
battle was on. At the first volley three Spaniards on the 

19 Carta (parrafos) & S. M. de los Oficiales Reales de la florida dando 
cuenta de varies asuntos de aquella provincia. San Agustin, 12 Octubre, 1580 
(A. G. /. 54-5-14. ^ Simancas. Secular. Audiencia de Santo Domingo. Cartas y 
expedientes de oficiales reales de la Florida yistos en el Consejo desde el Ano de 
1560 a 1684). 



272 Mary Ross 

flag-ship fell, with eight wounded; on the other frigate 
Captain Quiros and two sailors went down. The first 
shot from the flag-ship silenced twenty-six Frenchmen, 
nine dead and seventeen wounded. The other frigate 
revenged Captain Quiros' death by killing three French- 
men and wounding six. The struggle continued. Captain 
Gil, the French leader, clad from top to toe in a splendid 
gun-proof armor, fought with reckless nerve. In his 
heavy fighting regalia he appeared invulnerable; but a 
chance shot pierced his visor, took him in the temple, and, 
Goliath-like, the great sea-rover fell. 

For an hour or more the vessels remained broadside, 
one to another, the struggle continuing until only six 
Frenchmen were left. These six in desperation finally 
lifted their anchor in the hope that all would drift upon 
the shoals. Marques, seeing this, cut loose from the 
Frenchmen and placed himself in the channel. As night 
came on the surviving corsairs left their stranded vessel 
and boarded the helpless frigate that had been command- 
ed by Captain Quiros, hoping thereby to escape with the 
tide. The move came too late, for, as the sea rose, both 
the French ship and the appropriated frigate were 
washed upon the sands, and dashed "into a thousand 
pieces." Marques picked up the survivors in his three 
small boats, and "although there was little to cut, for 
they were shot to pieces with a thousand wounds" he 
decapitated the Frenchmen. 

The next morning the governor obtained several 
Frenchmen from the natives, who from the shore had 
witnessed the struggle. In all. Marques had lost eighteen 
men, while fourteen other Spaniards suffered severe 
wounds. The French loss was fifty-four, besides the 
negro slaves who were captured by the Spaniards.^o Out 



20 Auto sobre I09 negros que se tomaron en el nauio f ranees (A. G. I. 
2-5-4/12 Doc. No. 4-6 B). 



French Intrusions 273 

of the corsair crew Marques reserved four — a surgeon and 
three boys, the former no doubt to aid in the care of the 
wounded Spaniards. Before night the governor sailed 
back to San Agustin.21 

Captain Gil, it was learned, had been the leader of an 
organized band of corsairs. Coming out from Bordeaux 
under the patronage of a wealthy Frenchman, brother of 
the late Nicolas Estrozi, Gil had routed his expedition 
according to common practice. Leaving France with two 
vessels and seventy-three men, he made for the Carib- 
bean. He had two objects in mind, to seek Spanish spoils 
and to find Nicolas Estrozi, who had long been overdue. 
The usual recital characterizes GiFs log — two Spanish 
merchant vessels taken on the high seas ; wood and water 
garnered at Trinidad; trade attempted at Margarita; a 
fight with the colonists at Curasao, in which the Span- 
iards won the day; seizure of the sentinel at Rio de la 
Hacha, followed by a hasty flight when news came of 
the approach of the Spanish galleys ; a sail northward to 
plunder at San German, Mona, Saona, Santa Catalina, 
and Santo Domingo; then, a miscarried plan to seize a 
town on Jamaica; more trade at Ocoa, Savanna, and 
Giiaba; followed by a hurried sail to Cape San Antonio, 
to lie in wait for the treasure fleets and perhaps raid 
Vera Cruz, only to be frustrated in an encounter with 
the Armada and to sneak away under cover of darkness ; 
finally to appear at San Mateo in La Florida seeking food, 
wood, and water with a sudden remembrance of the long 
delayed errand of mercy. The rest of Gil's story has 
been told. Marques had triumphed over both Estrozi and 
Gil, but he was yet to feel the sting of their presence even 

21 Relacion de la victoria que el General Pero Menendez Marques Governa- 
dor de las Provincias de la Florida consiguio en el Puerto de Sn Mateo de aquella 
costa el dia 20 de Julio de 1580 de un cosario f ranees que aporto a el, su Capitan 
Gil, natural Catalan ; y otras noticias respectivas a Ics cosarios de la propia Nacion 
que Llegaron a la Misma Costa los meses de Julio y Agosto de 1580 (Direccion 
de Hidrografia. Madrid. Col. Navarrete T, 14 D. No. 50) ; Relacion Muy Verda- 
dera De lo sucedido en la florida en el mes De Julio De este De MDLXXX ; (A, G. 
I. 54-3-19) Juan Cevadilla y Lazaro Saez de Mercado a S. M. San Agustin, Octubre 
12, 1580 (A. G. I. 54-5-14 Doc. No. 7). 



274 Mary Ross 

after their passing, for GiFs spectacular death did not 
close the fourth French chapter on the Atlantic sea- 
board.22 

Other Corsairs on the Georgia Coast. — Captain GiFs 
expedition had been supplemented by a number of cap- 
tured or attached vessels that had been taken over during 
the Caribbean portion of his cruise. Two of these craft 
appear to have been under French pilots, but for some 
reason they had become detached from the mother ship 
during the raid on Jamaica and the encounter with the 
Spanish treasure fleet. However, the Guale destination 
of the expedition in search of Nicolas Estrozi was well 
known, and some days after the capture of Gil at San 
Mateo French vessels began to appear off the Georgia 
coast. 

News of the corsairs in Guale was received at both 
presidios through Indian messengers, who, swift of oar, 
quickly covered the intervening leagues by way of the in- 
side route. At the island of Guale (St. Catherine's 
Island) especially, as an outpost for Santa Elena, Cap- 
tain Quiros kept a soldier on duty to send out Indian 
runneris. 

This precaution was timely. During the months of 
July and August (1580) the natives reported the pres- 
ence of twenty vessels on the Georgia coast. Upon Gil's 
entrance into San Mateo harbor he had been accompanied 
by a second vessel that, after loading up with corn, fish, 
and venison, withdrew before the arrival of Marques. 
This second corsair probably sailed north, for "two days 
after the affray at San Mateo another appeared off the 
bar of San Pedro" (Cumberland Sound). Two of the 
free traders entered the harbor of Gualquini (St. Simon's 
Sound), established close friendship with the Indians, 

22 Ynform. on q. hizo Po Menendez Marques con los franceses q. tomo de 
la galeaza mediante Juo. Sanchez Ramon lengua (A. G. I. 2-5-4/12 Doc. No. 
4-6 B). 



French Intrusions 275 

"and sounded the bars." On the 28th of July, eight days 
after the encounter at San Mateo, "five appeared and at- 
tempted to cross the bar" of Guale, but a heavy sea pre- 
vented their entrance. Two weeks later, on the 7th of 
August, three other boats anchored near Zapala (Sa- 
pelo) ; one of these entered while the other remained out- 
side. Eleven days later "two others appeared off the 
same bar of Zapala, which is the best of this coast, and 
one of them, a tender, went in and sounded the bar and 
rivers inside, returning outside without speaking with 
the Indians." 

Most of the Georgia Indians had little to do with the 
strange visitors, but at Gualquini the Frenchmen found 
a ready reception with the cacique of that place and with 
the mico of Tolomato on the adjacent mainland. After 
the fight with Captain Gil, Marques had despatched the 
pilot major, Antonio Martin, to Santa Elena with sup- 
plies and munitions for that presidio. At the same time 
he warned Captain Quiros of the new French menace. 
Returning by the way of the Inland Passage, Martin 
stopped at Zapala. There he found the Indians friendly, 
but terrified over the appearance of a French vessel that 
had sounded that harbor several days before. The old 
cacique advised Martin to be on his guard, saying that 
"in the channel which they call Gualquini, there were 
two ships anchored within the harbor, obtaining water 
and wood." The Zapala chieftain had conversed with the 
Indians of Gualquini, and had learned from them that 
Frenchmen were looking for the crew of the El Principe, 
the French ship that had gone ashore near Santa Elena. 
The Indians also told Martin that the Frenchmen were 
very sad when they learned of Estrozi's death, and had 
said to the Indians: "Listen; if you wish we can have 
revenge, because we will return here soon with five ships 
and with many people and artillery. You will go with us. 
To you we will give the spoils, and you will be very rich." 



276 Mary Ross 

The same report was given to Martin by the cacique at 
Tupique, one of the mainland villages near Zapala. This 
was sufficient. Hurrying to San Agustin Martin report- 
ed the new danger to Marques.^^ 

The two vessels that entered the harbor at Gualquini 
were seeking their lost leader. Captain Gil. Upon receiv- 
ing news of his death and of the earlier destruction of the 
Estrozi band, the Frenchmen vowed revenge. Calling 
the Indians into conference, the corsairs plotted and 
planned. After much parleying and exchange of gifts 
they came to terms. The French were to return the next 
spring with five vessels carrying many men and much 
artillery. In the meantime the Gualquini Indians were 
to stir up the entire Georgia-Carolina seaboard, and by 
bribery and stratagem they were to seize upon several 
Spaniards who would later be used as guides. 

Aid from Spain. — Distressed over the delay in obtain- 
ing provisions and reinforcements, as well as greatly dis- 
turbed over the French intrusion. Marques must have 
been desperate. If relief failed to come, a simultaneous 
uprising of the natives in several districts might be ex- 
pected at any moment. The Crista and Cayagua Indians 
were in open rebellion ; those in the pueblos of Guale were 
under the influence of the French traders, who had prom- 
ised "to return in the spring with a force of ships and 
soldiers sufficient to fall upon the forts." At San Mateo 
a misconception of the maneuvers of Marques in the con- 
flict with Captain Gil had brought about "a suspicion of 
the cowardice of the Spaniards." This error stimulated 
the natural inclination of the Indian for colorful and ex- 
aggerated tale-bearing, and caused wild reports of Span- 
ish impotence to spread into the already disturbed prov- 
ince of Guale. September of that year must have dawned 



23 Ynform.o n. q. hizo P.o Menendez Marques sobre los dos nabyos fran- 
ceses q. entraron en gualequyny (A. G. I. 2-5-4/12 Doc, No. 4-6 C). 



French Intrusions 277 

cold and dark and grey, as though a dread crisis were at 
hand.24 

Across the seas, however, Philip II had not forgotten 
Marques. Manifold dangers and problems had caused 
delay, but on September 3 Captain Gutierrez de Miranda, 
accompanied by Rodrigo de Junco, crossed the bar at San 
Augustin, bringing relief. His Majesty had authorized 
Miranda to obtain fifty additional soldiers for La Florida 
in 1580, but on account of discords and factions in Spain 
it had been possible to bring only forty-three. And un- 
fortunately many of these soldiers were mere youths, 
being less than twenty years of age, and little fitted for 
service on that strenuous f rontier.25 

The Conspiracy at St. Simon's, — The return of An- 
tonio Martin to San Agustin on September 11, gave con^ 
firmation to Marques' fears. The new situation in Guale 
was alarming. Quiros, too, had sent reports from Santa 
Elena that distressed the Governor.^s The Indians there 
were behaving suspiciously. French plotting was show- 
ing its effects. According to their design the Gualquini 
(St. Simon's Island) natives were to enter into an alliance 
with all the seaboard Indians, and these, in conjunction 
with the French, were to wipe out of existence the Span- 
iards with their forbidding presidios. Playing upon the 
old key of native oppression by their Spanish overlords, 
and claiming to be the friends of the Indians and first 
possessors of Georgia, the Frenchmen lavished gifts on 
the St. Simon's caciques and departed for the Azores, 
promising to come back in the spring with men and muni- 
tions sufficient to exterminate the Spaniards. 



24 Marques to His Catholic Majesty, October 15, 1580. A general report 
on conditions in Florida (A. G. I. Audiencia de Santo Domingo, 54-5-9). 

26 Carta del capitan Gutierre de Miranda sobre el estado del fuerte de S. 
Agustin. Oct. 14, 1580 {A. G. I. 54-5-16. Simancas. Secular. Audiencia de 
Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de personas seculares de la Florida vistos 
en el Consejo desde el ano de 1539 a 1600). 

26 Thomas Bernaldo de Quiros a su magestad, Santa Elena, Setiembre 
6, 1580 (A. G. I. 54-5-16. Documento No. 24). 



278 Mary Ross 

In order to make the plot effective the Indians must 
do their part. Baiting the caciques with "certain coins 
of gold and an image of silver," and bestowing upon them 
axes and other tools, the Frenchmen directed the strata- 
gems to be used. The Spaniards must be wearied with 
watching and unnerved by fears. To effect this, the In- 
dians were to keep up a steady stream of minor attacks 
upon the two presidios ; and as several Spaniards would 
be needed as guides and interpreters for the French, the 
Indians were to deceive the captain of Santa Elena and 
induce him to send some of his men down to Guale for 
corn which the Indians had supposedly harvested and of- 
fered as tribute. They were to be captured and held by 
the natives. 

But before the neatly laid plot could get under way it 
was partially revealed by one of the Guale chieftains, who 
was visiting at Santa Elena. One day while Captain 
Quiros was drilling his men at Santa Elena and instruct- 
ing them in tactics necessary if a real battle with the 
French were to occur, one of the bystanders, Domingo 
de Leon, turned to the Georgia cacique who stood near, 
and quizzed him on his estimate of the Spanish maneu- 
vers. 

"Very good," replied the chieftain. "It is necessary 
that you become skillful. You will need to be, because 
the French may harm you and take your fort." 

Leon boastfully responded that the Spaniards were 
neither afraid of the Frenchmen nor of the natives. The 
old Indian, However, had the last word. Turning to the 
Spaniard he burst out: 

"It is imperative for you to be ready, because the 
French say that at the beginning of summer they will 
come upon you and upon the Indians of Guale and Crista." 
Conscious now that something was wrong, Leon hunted 



French Intrusions 279 

up the Gualean again, and asked why the Frenchmen 
were so desirous to make war. 

"Why?" replied the cacique. "It is because the 
Frenchmen said that the Indians had taken the fort which 
the Y'renchmen of the ship El Principe had built on the 
point of Santa Elena, and that the Spaniards had taken 
a ship in the San Mateo River, and had killed all the 
Frenchmen who were among the Indians all along this 
coast, and had hanged them, and for this reason they had 
to come to avenge their death." The cacique had learned 
all this from his neighbors at St. Simon's or Gualquini. 
Naturally, Le6n reported the conversation to Captain 
Quiros.27 

In the meanwhile the St. Simon's Indians were at 
work. Insidiously they spread their propaganda, and in 
fulfilment of their part of the agreement they invited 
Captain Quiros to send Spanish soldiers down to Quale 
to receive the corn that they were supposed to have 
harvested. 

Anxious to hunt down the rumors of French intrigue, 
and deceived by the friendly manner of the Indians, 
Quiros responded. Three Spaniards were sent to Guale 
to investigate the situation. They were under strict or- 
ders to return within a limited period. But days passed 
and the men became overdue. Then one day twelve or 
thirteen Gualeans who had been working at Santa Elena 
quietly withdrew. Alarmed, Captain Quiros prepared for 
trouble. His precautions were wise. A little later, when 
a friendly Indian was sent out into the woods to gather 
fuel, he was killed from ambush. Within three days the 
island was in an uproar. Fully a thousand natives gath- 
ered on the outskirts of the settlement. For fifteen days 
Quiros was under arms, ready for an attack. But fortu- 
nately Marques had received aid from Spain and, dis- 

27 D. La q. higo el Capitan Vicente G.os sobre la Rebelion de los Yndios 
de guale a 4 de ote, 1580 y como los yndios tractaron y contractaron con I09 
franceses (A. G. I. 2-5-4/12. Doc. No. 4-6 D). 



280 Mary Ross 

turbed by the reports from Guale and the silence of San 
Marcos, he determined to investigate conditions on the 
northern border. Calling Vicente Gonzales, his old aide 
and chief captain at San Agustin, Marques ordered an- 
other reconnaissance of the Georgia-Carolina seaboard. 

The Gonzales Expedition to Santa Elena and Guale. — 
Sailing by way of the Inland Passage, Gonzales arrived 
at Santa Elena at daybreak October 4. There he was 
welcomed by Captain Quiros, who acquainted him with 
the general state of affairs ; but in order to give a more 
formal report to Marques Captain Gonzales took testi- 
mony from both Quiros and Domingo de Leon in regard 
to the Franco-Indian conspiracy. Returning by way of 
the Inland Passage as far as Tupiqui (on the mainland 
near St. Catherine's), Gonzales sought information from 
the natives. At Tupique he was able to communicate with 
the cacique, but most of the Indians appeared to be in 
hiding. Finally, by persuasive words and much flattery, 
Gonzales induced the Tupique leader to send a messenger 
to him. In need of first-hand testimony, the Spaniards 
seized the Indian, whose name was Ahongate, and carried 
him to San Agustin. There Marques obtained from the 
captive more details of the French intrigue with the St. 
Simon's natives. From him he learned that twenty-two 
chieftains had conspired to seize the Spaniards sent down 
to Guale by Quiros, and had entered into the design to 
attack the Spanish settlements. Marques' investigation 
had been opportune. The Indians at Gualquini and Tol- 
omato (on Sapelo River) were in open rebellion, while 
those around Santa Elena were extremely disaffected. 
Two thousand fighting-men were reported to be on the 
warpath.28 



28 D. La q. hico el Capitan Vicente G.os sobre la Rebelion de los Yndios 
de guale a 4 de ote. 1580 y como los yndios tractaron y contractaron con los 
franceses {A. G. I. 2-4-4/12 Doc. No. 4-6 D ; Carta de RodHgo de Junco al Rey 
dando cuenta de lo ocurrido con los cosarios franceses de San Agustin de la 
Florida, 12 de Octubre de 1580 (A. G. I. 54-5-16. Simancas. Seculares. Audien- 
cia de Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de personas seculares de la Florida 
1539 a 1600). 



French Intrusions 281 

The Uprising Quelled, — On October 14 Miranda noti- 
fied Philip II of the state of affairs in La Florida and of 
his plans to go to the assistance of Santa Elena as soon 
as a wind should permit sailing.29 Aided by Miranda 
and Junco, Marques soon quelled the uprising and, al- 
though he despaired of regaining the whole-hearted sup- 
port of the northern Indians, matters were more peaceful 
in La Florida during January, 1581. On the last day of 
that month the governor wrote to Philip II, expressing 
the desire to go to Spain to acquaint his Majesty with the 
information which he had learned from the captured 
Frenchmen — information which he did not dare to trust 
to paper.30 This request for temporary release from 
frontier duty carried with it a sense of momentary quiet- 
ude, although the promise of the Frenchmen to return 
and renew alliance with the Guale natives during the 
spring could not have failed to cause concern. 

Marques had broken the strength of the French in- 
trusion. The ferreting out of Captain Estrozi's band, 
and the victory over Captain Gil, had stayed the hand of 
the French and saved the Atlantic seaboard once more 
for Spain. Today, in spite of the efforts of revenue cut- 
ters, smuggling is still common on that frontier, and yet, 
nearly three and a half centuries ago. Marques policed 
the same defiant coast and successfully coped with a horde 
of lawless seamen who infested its shores. For the great- 
er part of four years (1577-1581) Spain's great admiral 
had kept the watch. Indian uprisings, instigated at first 
by Spanish demands upon native granaries, had taken on 
new life under French encouragement. Only by the keen- 
est watchfulness and the greatest fortitude of spirit had 
that lone figure quelled the native unrest and eradicated 
the French Menace. 



29 Carta del capitan Gutierre de Miranda sobre el estado del fuerte de 
S. Agustm. Oct. 14, 1580 (A. G. I. 54-5-16. Simancas. Secular. Audiencia de 
Santo Domingo. Cartas y expedientes de personas seculares de la Florida vistos 
en el Consejo desde el ano de 1539 a 1600). 

30 Carta de Pedro Menendez Marques a ult. de Enero 1581 (A. G. I. 54-5- 
11. Simancas. Secular. Audiencia de Santo Domingo Cartas y expedientes de 
Gobernadores de la Florida vistos en el Consejo desde el ano de 1568 a 1611). 



CIVIL WAR INCIDENTS IN MACON 

(The following statements concerning two interesting 
events in the history of Macon during the Civil War have 
been written by Captain John A. Cobb, through whose 
kindness the Quarterly is permitted to print them.) 

The Stoneman Raid 

When General Stoneman approached Macon, General 
Howell Cobb, in command of Macon, not having sufficient 
military force, called on all the able-bodied men in Macon 
to assist in defending their homes. General Joseph E. 
Johnston, having been suspended from the command of 
the Tennessee Army, was staying in Macon. He reported 
to General Cobb and tendered his services. General Cobb 
asked him to take command, which he declined to do, but 
stood by General Cobb and gave directions as to the ar- 
rangement of the line of battle. There was only one shot 
fired by Stoneman and that was from a piece of artillery 
on the Clinton Road, which struck one of the fluted col- 
umns of Mr. Asa Holt's home on Mulberry street. Gen- 
eral Stoneman, hearing that the Confederate cavalry was 
pursuing him, hastily retreated, and was met at Sunshone 
Church near Round Oak by Brigadier-General Alfred 
Iverson's cavalry. A battle ensued and General Stone- 
man and a number of his soldiers were captured, and 
brought into Macon next day. The balance of his com- 
mand scattered and ultimately reached General Sherman's 
lines. A large amount of military equipment was col- 
lected on the battle-field and brought to Macon. It might 
be well to state that the call of General Cobb on the able- 
bodied men of Macon to defend their homes, was prompt- 
ly responded to. 

General Wilson's Capture of Macon 

General Howell Cobb received a telegram from Gen- 
eral Joseph E. Johnston, stating that his and General, 
Lee's army had both surrendered, and an order from Gen- 
eral Sherman that all United States forces should halt 
wherever the order reached them. General Wilson was 
approaching Macon in three columns. General Cobb sent 
a flag of truce out each road on which the Federal col- 



Civil War Incidents In Macon 283 

umns were approaching. The leading column was the 
12th Illinois Cavalry; the Colonel stated to the bearer 
of General Cobb's communication that the General, Wil- 
son, was in the rear, and that he would communicate with 
him; but continued to advance. Major Morgan of Gen- 
eral Cobb's staff, who had carried the communication, 
rode rapidly back to Macon and notified General Cobb of 
what had occurred. General Cobb had already sent out 
notice to his troops that the war was over, and that no 
resistance was to be made to the approaching Federals. 
General Cobb surrendered to the Colonel of the 12th Illi- 
nois under protest. The Federal troops immediately took 
possession in Macon, and General Wilson arrived in the 
city that night or the next morning. General Howell 
Cobb had been sent to Montgomery, Alabama, to take 
command there upon the approach of General Wilson's 
troops to Montgomery, and had fallen back and collected 
his troops at Columbus, Georgia, where a serious battle 
was fought with General Wilson's command. Colonel C. 
A. L. Lamar was killed in that battle. General Cobb, and 
what force he could collect, retreated from Columbus to 
Macon. General Wilson had, of troops and camp follow- 
ers, over 20,000 men, who soon exhausted the Confeder- 
ate stock of supplies and provisions at Macon ; and he sent 
out foraging parties through the surrounding country to 
collect supplies. General Cobb went to General Wilson 
and told him that his (Wilson's) orders, would not be 
respected beyond where his troops were stationed, but 
that the orders of General Cobb would be obeyed any- 
where in Georgia ; and that there was a lot of Confederate 
supplies in the depots on the Southwestern Railroad ; and 
that if he would send out no more foraging parties he. 
General Cobb, would have these supplies sent into Macon 
and turned over to him, which was done. A condition 
existed then that never has existed before or since. Gen- 
eral Cobb maintained his military headquarters, with 
staff and couriers, and for two weeks issued regular mili- 
tary orders ; a prisoner of war, maintaining headquarters 
and assisting the Federal General who had captured him. 



284 Captain John A. Cobb 

General Cobb had his headquarters in the former home 
of his brother-in-law, Colonel John B. Lamar, who lost 
his life, acting on General Cobb's staff, at Champton Gap, 
Maryland ; as did also Colonel Jefferson Lamar, a brother 
of Lucius Q. C. Lamar, who commanded the infantry of 
Cobb's Legion. These were the only two officers of Gen- 
eral Cobb's command who were killed in that battle ; and 
both of whom were his relatives by marriage. General 
Cobb, after completing the task of turning over supplies 
to General Wilson, went to his home in Athens, Georgia. 
A short time afterward General Wilson received from 
Secretary of War Stanton an order sending General Cobb 
to Washington City. General Wilson sent an officer to 
Athens who arrested General Cobb, and they started to 
Washington. General Wilson telegraphed Secretary 
Stanton, "I have complied with your order to send Gen- 
eral Cobb to Washington. General Cobb has not violated 
the terms of the parole that I gave him. I demand his 
instant release ; and if this is not done, please accept my 
resignation as Major-General of the United States 
forces." General Wilson then was only thirty years of 
age. General Cobb was released and returned home. This 
occurred more than two weeks before the same action 
was taken by General Grant in regard to General Lee. 
General Cobb was arrested a second time, and released, 
which he was satisfied was due to the influence and efforts 
of General Wilson. He was never molested by the Fed- 
eral authorities afterward. 

When the Spanish- American war came on, General 
Wilson having resigned from the United States Army, his 
name was sent to the United States Senate for appoint- 
ment as Major-General. His friends, knowing of the cap- 
ture of Macon by General Wilson, and that Senator Bacon 
was a citizen of Macon, feared opposition by him to the 
confirmation of General Wilson. To their surprise, Sen- 
ator Bacon seconded the nomination for confirmation, and 
passed a handsome eulogy on General Wilson and his 
conduct at Macon. 



BOOK REVIEWS 

Jefferson Davis, Constitutionalist: His Letters, 
Papers and Speeches, Collected and Edited by Dunbar 
Rowland, LL. D. 10 Vols. (Jackson, Miss.: Missis- 
sippi Department of Archives and History, 1923.) 

More than fifteen years ago the first preliminary 
steps were taken by the Mississippi Department of Ar- 
chives and History toward the important desideratum of 
a collected edition of the writings of Jefl:erson Davis. 
The work has been carried on with great zeal by Dr. 
Rowland, and is now completed with the publication of 
these "Letters, Papers and Speeches" in ten volumes, 
which constitute a most important addition to the docu- 
mentary history of the Confederacy and the Civil War, 
for which all students of this period owe Dr. Rowland a 
heavy debt. 

As Dr. Rowland remarks in his Introduction, "it is 
unfortunate that the publication of historical source ma- 
terial concerning the government of the Confederate 
States has in the past been largely of a military nature. 
Such material should be widely published, but not to the 
neglect of equally if not more important sources dealing 
with causes and motives." The Davis papers are widely 
scattered. The largest and most valuable collection is 
in the Confederate Memorial Hall in New Orleans. The 
next in value is in the Confederate Museum at Richmond. 
Both these collections have been used by Dr. Rowland in 
preparing his edition of the Southern president's writ- 
ings, as also the papers in the Manuscripts Division of 
the Library of Congress, the Old Records Division of the 
War Department, the Mississippi Department of 
Archives and History, and many other collections, public 
and private. 



286 Book Reviews 

The letters on military subjects, in the Confederate 
Memorial Hall Collection, were used in the compilation of 
the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Arm- 
ies, though "the rules of exclusion and inclusion by which 
the copyists were guided are not entirely clear." The 
letters dealing with other than military topics are here 
published for the first time. Many letters written to 
Davis, as well as those written by him, are included. 
Speeches are printed in full, and many documents re- 
ferred to in the letters or speeches or state papers are 
also printed in the text or the notes, increasing the value 
of the work as a source of reference. 

"The policy pursued in editing is a mean between 
overloading the page with notations which may seem 
pedantic on the one hand and failing to provide suffi- 
cient helps to the investigator or reader on the other." 
In general, the results of this policy seem satisfactory, 
although occasional notes seem perhaps not quite essen- 
tial, and in several places the reviewer finds allusions to 
persons concerning whom the text might well have been 
accompanied with a note, but is not. On the whole, the 
editorial work appears to have been carefully done, with 
due regard for completeness and accuracy. 

It is in the Index, extensive and almost exhaustive 
as it is (covering 168 pages) , that the work is chiefly sub- 
ject to criticism. Weaknesses, mainly of three kinds, 
are apparent. Many references, first, are given unneces- 
sarily, because under headings which the investigator 
will be unlikely to consult: for example, the proposed 
terms for reunion with the North are indexed under 
''Terms for reunion," as well as under the better key- 
word ''Reunion"; the reports and rumors of hostility (in 
1861) toward Northerners, are indexed under "Hostility 
in South, a false report," but also, rather unnecessarily, 
under "False reports" and under "Rumors." A second 



The Jefferson Davis Papers 287 

frequent fault is the separation of closely allied refer- 
ences under different heads, with a notably insufficient 
use of cross-references: for example, we find the two 
headings, "Money of Confederacy" and "Confederate 
money," which should have been combined under one 
head, or should at least have had references from each 
to the other; the entries which are given under "Navy 
of Confederacy" are entirely distinct from the entries 
under "Confederate navy," and here again there is no 
reference to ensure the investigator's finding both entries. 
A third fault is poor judgment in choice of key- words: 
for example, we have certain references under ''Exchange 
of prisoners in Civil War," which are not duplicated 
under the better head "Prisoners of war" ; the interfer- 
ence of British cruisers with American commerce is in- 
dexed under ''American commerce" (also under "British 
cruisers"), but not under the more obvious word com- 
merce, which, however, is used for several other passages 
of the text which treat of commercial topics. 

There are, too, many inconsistencies: for example, 
percussion rifles are indexed under "Percussion" and not 
under "Rifles" although under the latter head we find 
a reference to breech-loading rifles, while another 
passage treating of breech-loading arms is brought out 
only under that heading, and not under "Rifles." In 
many cases proper names in the index are entered 
under the surname, followed only by the title "gen- 
eral," "colonel," etc., and not by the given name 
or initials. Who is "Capt. Lee," who is filed between 
"Lee, Massachusetts" and "Lee, Cassius F., Jr."? Light- 
Horse Harry Lee's part in the Whiskey Rebellion is 
brought out, not with other references under his name, 
but under "Lee, General," preceding "Lee, Massachu- 
setts" and all the rest of the list. Governor Edwin D. 
Morgan of New York is indexed merely as "Gov. Mor- 
gan", between "Fort Morgan" and "James M. Morgan." 



288 Book Reviews 

The indexer did not take the trouble to ascertain that 
"Davis, Representative from Mississippi, 1859," was the 
same gentleman who appears next in the list as "Col. 
and Gen. Reuben Davis," but entered him under the 
semi-anonymous form by which he is mentioned in the 
text. In general, the index follows too slavishly the exact 
phraseology and form of the text, and gives too little 
care to bringing all related material together under the 
same headings, and to choice of the best headings. These 
defects are pointed out, not in a spirit of criticism of so 
valuable a work, but because no student and investigator 
can use the work satisfactorily without bearing in mind 
these features of the index. 

Dr. Rowland expresses his hope of following up this 
edition of the Davis papers with a new "Life of Jefferson 
Davis." It is to be hoped that this intention will be ful- 
filled, and that we may have a new and careful study of 
his life and career, based on study of the sources which 
are here made available, and to which Dr. Rowland has 
had access in the originals. 

C. S. T. 



PRINTED BY 
REVIEW PUBLISHING & PRINTING COMPANY 
SAVANNAH, GA. 



.v>* 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 

QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 4 



DECEMBER. 1923 



"''■^ 



THE 

GEORGIA HISTORICAL 

QUARTERLY 




PUBLISHED BY THE 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 



VOL. VII No. 4 



DECEMBER. 1923 



One Dollar a Number Three Dollars a Year 



Entered as fiecond-class matter, April 19, 1923, at the post oflice at 
Savannah, Ga., under the Act of August 24. 1912. 



GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

OFFICERS 

President Vice-President 

WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING Atlanta 

First Vice-President Vice-President 

R. P. BROOKS Athens LAWTON B. EVANS -Augusta 

Vice-President Secretary-Treasurer 

OTIS ASHMORE _ Savannah CHARLES F. GROVES -Savannah 

Librarian 
WILLIAM HARDEN......... ^Savannah 

CURATORS 

OTIS ASHMORE Savannah HENRY R. GOETCHIUS Columbus 

R. P. BROOKS „ _ Athens WILLIAM W. GORDON Savannah 

MRS. B. F. BULLARD Savannah ALEXANDER C. KING... Atlanta 

ANDREW J. COBB J^thens MRS. A. R. LAWTON Savannah 

T. M. CUNNINGHAM, Jr Savannah A. C. NEWELL Atlanta 

LAWTON B. EVANS Augusta ORVILLE A. PARK Macon 

P. S. FLIPPIN.- Macon MRS. GORDON SAUSSY .Savannah 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON Savannah 

BOARD OF EDITORS 

ROBERT PRESTON BROOKS University of Georgia 

ELLIS MERTON COULTER..... - University of Georgia 

PERCY SCOTT FLIPPIN Mercer University 

J. G. JOHNSON University of Georgia 

MANAGING EDITOR 

C. SEYMOUR THOMPSON 
Savannah Public Library 



CONTENTS 

"The Supreme Court in United States History" 

Alexander R, Lawton 289 

The Populist Movement in Georgia 

Alex Mathews Arnett, Ph, D ...313 

A Spanish Settlement in Carolina, 1526 

J. G. Johnson, M. A 339 

Editorial Note 349 

Book Reviews .....346 



Cfhe Qeorgid Historical Quarterly 

Polume Ull DECEMBER. 1023 Number 4 

"THE SUPREME COURT 
IN UNITED STATES HISTORY"^ 

By Alexander R. Lawton 
Savannah, Ga. 

This book of more than fifteen hundred pages in three 
large volumes received the Pulitzer prize as the best con- 
tribution to the historical literature of 1922, an honor 
which it clearly deserves. It is now in its third printing. 
Its author, Charles Warren of Massachusetts, has been an 
active practitioner of the law, formerly associated with 
such men as Moorfield Storey and Governor William E. 
Russell, and for four years was an Assistant Attorney 
General of the United States. He is the author of History 
of the Harvard Law School and early Legal Conditions in 
America (three volumes, 1909), and a History of the 
American Bar, Colonial and Federal, to 1860 (1911) . He 
is well qualified to undertake the work which he has so 
well done. It bears every evidence of the most careful 
and critical research, particularly into current publica- 
tions and political speeches of the periods in which the 
Supreme Court delivered judgments which materially af- 
fected the history of the United States. To this add the 
clear and lawyerlike analysis of the opinions, with full 
appreciation of the extent to which they did go and the 
limitations which they contained. It would not be at first 
blush an exciting subject, but, notwithstanding the size 
of the three volumes, the writer of this notice found it 
difficult to keep early hours until he had finished them. 



1 Warren, Charlci, The Suvreme Court in United Statet History. 8 Vols. 
(Boston : Little. Brown A Co.. 1922.) 



290 Alexander R. Lawton 

Primarily the word history is used in two senses— as 
the record of events, and also as indicating the events 
themselves. It has no narrow compass. It is well said 
that economic growth, the evolution of ethics, the very 
evolution of the universe itself, are all history. When we 
speak of history in the popular sense we generally refer 
to the doings of the legislative and executive departments, 
which in ancient history were united in the person of the 
king, and in the most modern history are represented by 
presidents and parliaments. The history that we know 
popularly is related in the enactments of Congress and of 
state legislatures ; the doings of presidents and governors ; 
and in some instances (for example, secession) the united 
act of the people of an entire state. 

Probably in no other country could we find much his- 
torical matter in the judgments of the courts. The situa- 
tion of the United States of America is exceptional. For 
the first time in history, a marvelous group of able states- 
men which the sparse population of 1787 produced, under- 
took to create a government with a written constitution,, 
one not possessed of all the powers which appertain to 
sovereignty, but only of those which the contributing sov- 
ereign states chose to delegate to it in writing; and so 
particular were the states to make this clear that as a 
part of its ratification, and almost simultaneously with its 
acceptance, the Tenth Amendment was adopted to make 
this fact clear and beyond dispute. 

But this was not the only unique feature in the Con- 
stitution of this government so far removed from the 
countries of the world which had heretofore made history. 
It created a tribunal whose duties and powers were un- 
precedented. It is difficult to believe that the makers of 
the Constitution realized that they were creating a court 
which was authorized to finally decide, not only questions 
of pure substantive and administrative law, but questions 



The Supreme Court in the United States 291 

which had no relation to private law as generally under- 
stood and as affecting individual rights ; questions of gov- 
ernment, political questions, using the term in its broad 
sense. It was made the great and final arbiter between 
the original thirteen states and their later associates on 
the one side, and the government of limited sovereignty 
which they had created on the other. Probably few of 
these great statesmen realized what would be, what neces- 
sarily must be, the influence of this court on the history 
of the country. 

It has been Mr. Warren's privilege not only to per- 
sonally appreciate this influence himself, but to exhaust- 
ively and completely present it to the country. Fortunate 
indeed are we that the task v/as assumed by one so thor- 
oughly qualified to perform it. The almost controlling in- 
fluence of the Supreme Court on the history of the United 
States has heretofore been almost ignored, if even recog- 
nized. So noted a historian as Henry Adams makes what 
Mr. Warren calls the inept statement that "history has 
nothing to do with the law except to record the develop- 
ment of legal principles." 

Let us gather the author's purpose from the opening 
words of his introductory chapter: 

The history of the United States has been written not merely 
in the halls of Congress, in the Executive offices and on the bat- 
tlefields, but to a great extent in the chambers of the Supreme 
Court of the United States. "In the largest proportion of causes 
submitted to its judgment, every decision becomes a page of his- 
tory." "In not one serious study of American political life," said 
Theodore Roosevelt at a dinner of the Bar in honor of Judge Har- 
lan in 1902, "will it be possible to omit the immense part played 
by the Supreme Court in the creation, not merely the modification, 
of the great policies, through and by means of which the country 
has moved on to her present position. . . . The Judges of the 
Supreme Court of the land must be not only great jurists, they 
must be great constructive statesmen, and the truth of what I say 
is illustrated by every study of American statesmanship." The 
vitally important part, however, which that Court has played in 
the history of the country in preserving the Union, in maintaining 
National supremacy within the limits of the Constitution, in up- 
holding the doctrines of international law and the sanctity of 



292 Alexander R. Lawton 

treaties, and in affecting the trend of the economic, social and polit- 
ical development of the United States, cannot be understood by a 
mere study of its decisions, as reported in the law books. The 
Court is not an organism dissociated from the conditions and his- 
tory of the times in which it exists. It does not formulate and 
deliver its opinions in a legal vacuum. Its Judges are not abstract 
and impersonal oracles, but are men whose views are necessarily, 
though by no conscious intent, affected by inheritance, education 
and environment and by the impact of history past and present; 
and as Judge Holmes has said: "The felt necessities of the time, 
the prevalent moral and political theories, intuitions of public pol- 
icy, avowed or unconscious, even the prejudices which Judges share 
with their fellow-men, have had a good deal more to do than the 
syllogism in determining the rules by which men should be gov- 
erned." 

The writing of impartial history is almost if not quite 
impossible. Gamaliel Bradford, author of Confederate 
Portraits, Union Portraits, American Portraits, Portraits 
of Women, and of Lee, the American, seems to come as 
near to being impartial as any contemporary writer, and 
yet in a supplement to his Lee, the American, on the 
writing of history he says : 

First, one would wish to be fair-minded, impartial, free from 
prejudice. This is, I think, impossible, and the impartial historian, 
or biographer — that is he who studies his subject in and for itself, 
without preconception or prepossession, without an instinctive dis- 
position to misrepresent from one cause or another, — does not exist. 
There are simply those who think they are impartial, and those 
who know they are not (p. 270). . . . And still he may fall into 
an even more pervasive and treacherous form of misrepresentation : 
he may be misled by a personal affection for his subject, for his 
model, for what, in a certain sense, becomes almost his child. Prob- 
ably no biographer who is worth much is altogether free from this. 
(p. 272.) 

Bradford's comments refer chiefly to biography, and 
Warren's book is history. At the same time it may prop- 
erly be regarded as a biography of the court. It brings 
before you with remarkable clearness the successive steps 
in its life, and presents recurring pictures of the varying 
personalities who have thus splendidly maintained the 
heavy responsibilities which they had assumed. It shows 
them, practically without exception, as deaf to popular 
clamor, guided only by a sense of duty, fully cognizant at 
all times of the great power conferred upon them and the 



The Supreme Court in the United States 293 

duties thus imposed, silently submitting to abuse and vili- 
fication which often involved attacks upon personal char- 
acter ; faithfully, diligently, fearlessly and brilliantly per- 
forming from day to day and from year to year the great 
task (almost unwittingly conferred upon them) of defin- 
ing from time to time the line of demarcation between the 
powers delegated by the states to the national government 
and the powers retained. In some few isolated instances 
(Marbury vs Madison and the Dred Scott Case are con- 
spicuous illustrations) we discern the apparently deliber- 
ate intent to go beyond the questions necessarily involved 
in the decision, and to announce principles and rulings 
which were not necessary; but in a great majority of 
cases great care was exercised to remember that their 
task was only to decide the justiciable controversies which 
came before them as the result of litigated cases involving 
personal rights, and to let all aliunde questions await de- 
cision until the exposition of them was necessary to the 
decision of the particular case then before the court. 

Mr. Warren has recognized the difficulty of a histor- 
ical perspective in considering the more recent cases 
before the Supreme Court, and closed his presentation 
with the death of Chief Justice Waite in 1888. He re- 
views substantially one hundred years of the activities of 
the court, and in so far as it made history they were the 
critical years. Indeed, with few exceptions all of the 
cases materially affecting our history were decided before 
the Civil War in the first seventy years of the Govern- 
ment. Those cases established not only the rules of con- 
struction, but the general lines of division between Fed- 
eral and State Governments, and promulgated the final 
decree, followed later by many supplemental confirmatory 
decrees, that in 1789 the states had scrapped the Confed- 
eration as a weakling and created a nation, able under all 
circumstances and in all emergencies to sustain itself as 
such whenever it had behind it its Executive and a major- 



294 Alexander R. Lawton 

ity of the Senators and Representatives selected by the 
states or by the people; and this notwithstanding the 
vigorous and in many cases bitter opposition of a minor- 
ity (usually a very small minority) of the state govern- 
ments. Most of its structural decisions have been at- 
tacked, generally with the most violent political partisan- 
ship, but it does not appear that they have been con- 
demned by a majority of the states or the people. 

From beginning to end the history of the court con- 
firms what has been so often demonstrated — that its judg- 
ments have not been controlled by the previous political 
affiliations of its personnel. During the greater part of 
his term John Marshall, Federalist, sat with judges a 
majority of whom were "Republicans," which then meant 
strong advocates of state rights. Marshall's great suc- 
cessor, Taney, is generally regarded as the great State 
Rights Chief Justice, but there is no clearer and stronger 
assertion of the supremacy of the Constitution and laws 
of the United States over all others, and of the inability 
of either the executive, the legislative, or the judicial de- 
partment of the states to interfere with their adminis- 
tration, than Taney's decision in Ableman vs Booth, 21 
Howard 506 (1859), in "an opinion which Marshall him- 
self never excelled in loftiness of tone." (Warren, III, 
60.) Taney's successor. Chief Justice Chase, fresh from 
Lincoln's cabinet was naturally a Federalist, but during 
his brief term, in almost every case that came before him 
involving relative rights and powers of the states and 
the national government, he sided with the states. To 
come down to more recent times, the late Chief Justice 
White, a Southerner, a Confederate soldier, a Democratic 
Senator from Louisiana active in the councils of his po- 
litical party, was recognized as the strongest Federalist 
upon the bench, while the greatest protector of the rights 
of the states against encroachment by the Federal Govern- 



The Supreme Court in the United States 295 

ment was probably Mr. Justice Holmes of Massachusetts, 
a Federal soldier and a lifelong Republican. 

It was the court presided over by Marshall which, 
without regard to previous political affiliations, and domi- 
nated by his great intellect, permanently placed the Fed- 
eral Government upon a firm foundation and permitted it 
to exercise its functions with or without the consent and 
acquiescence of the individual states after they had once 
ratified the Constitution, and the court presided over by 
Taney did not undo his work. It did not attempt to re- 
verse the great decisions. The people had created one 
supreme tribunal to expound and interpret an instrument 
which had itself created a Nation, to settle vital contro- 
versies between independent sovereigns, not as arbitra- 
tors entering awards, but as a court entering judgments. 
Thirteen sovereigns surrendered some important attri- 
butes of their sovereignty to a fourteenth sovereign, 
which they created for the purpose of exercising desig- 
nated functions for the joint use of all. Their jealous 
guardianship of what they had retained was to be ex- 
pected. We should wonder, not that conflicts occurred, 
but that settlement of all the great underlying principles 
of complex relations, never before tested in the long his- 
tory of man, took so short a time. 

Taney was a great chief justice, so great that many 
extreme advocates of state rights rank him above Mar- 
shall. While no eminent American except Washington 
received more contemporaneous abuse and vilification 
than Marshall, Taney was a close judicial second. The 
slander that he had held in the Dred Scott Case, 9 How- 
ard, 893 (1857), that the negro had no rights that the 
white man was bound to respect, is never repeated by 
those who have studied or even carefully read his opin- 
ion; but notwithstanding his many great decisions and 
the undoubted purity and loftiness of his character, the 



296 Alexander R. Lawton 

Dred Scott case has materially affected his popular fame. 
Outside of the merits of the question — a question of law, 
whether a negro was or was not a citizen within the mean- 
ing of the Constitution, which was decided negatively by 
the majority, there was nothing for the court to decide; 
for the plaintiff had no status as a plaintiff, and there was 
no case in court. The opinion of the court was originally 
written on this question alone, and it was unfortunate 
that afterward the majority (the minority naturally fol- 
lowing) decided to deliver opinions on other questions in- 
volving the bitter issue of slavery, but which were clearly 
obiter. They were delivered just two days after the in- 
auguration of Buchanan, in whose administration our 
radical constitutional differences ripened into war. Taney 
and his associates erred in the Dred Scott case as did 
Marshall and his associates in Marbury vs Madison 
(1803), and in each case the attack upon their fame is 
launched, not against the opinion on the material question 
necessary to the decision of the case, but on the obiter 
dicta. It would be difficult to find better proof than these 
two cases of the folly which a judge commits when he 
travels beyond what is required in the settlement of the 
justiciable controversy before him. 

Chief Justice Taney again unnecessarily strayed into 
an obiter dictum in the great case of Ex parte Milligan, 
U Wallace 2 (1866), where the court unanimously decided 
that the President could not establish a military commis- 
sion to try capital crimes where the civil courts were 
open, and the majority went farther and decided what 
was not before them, that even Congress could not do 
this. From this obiter proposition there were four dis- 
sents. (Warren, III. 148.) 

We always think of Chief Justice Chase coming out of 
Lincoln's cabinet as an intense Federalist. We know that 
in politics he was an intense partisan. Mr. Warren, how- 



The Supreme Court in the United States 297 

ever, shows that in his brief service as Chief Justice, 
while the commerce cases coming before the court were 
few in number, they were all decided in favor of the 
states. They included Paul vs Virginia, 8 Wheat, 168 
(1869), which settled for all time that insurance was not 
interstate commerce. Is it not a debatable question 
whether this case would have been so decided if it had 
come before the court in the present day? On the other 
hand, is it any more of a state rights decision than the 
holding that the application to automobiles traveling in- 
terstate, of local state license laws, was not, at least until 
Congress had acted, interference with interstate com- 
merce and therefore beyond the police powers of the 
state government? [Hendrick vs Maryland, 235, U. S., 
610 (1915), and Kane vs New Jersey, 242 U. S. 160 
(1916).-] 

There are extremists on both sides, but the zeal of 
those who are for state rights seems more intense. When 
one becomes a Federalist it is apt to be because he has in 
view some meritorious ultimate end which he feels can 
only be accomplished with Federal aid, or that his person- 
al rights are, in his judgment, seriously jeopardized by 
some state aggression which he selfishly hopes is prohib- 
ited by the Constitution. Many advocates of state rights 
are so extreme that they find it difficult to acknowledge 
the supremacy of John Marshall as a fearless, sincere, and 
wise patriot, and one of the most brilliant and able judges 
that ever sat upon a bench in any country in any age. 
On the other hand, I know no student of the court and its 
history who does not recognize Taney's high character, 
judicial spirit, and great ability. 

Is Reversal Desirable? 

Which of the monumental decisions of the court, and 
especially of those in which Marshall participated, would 
these extremists reverse, now that the dire predictions of 



298 Alexander R. Lawton 

former days have been tested and refuted by time and 
experience? 

It was in Brown vs Maryland, 12 Wheaton, 4,19 that 
the court in 1827 protected foreign commerce from bur- 
densome interference by the state. Maryland had under- 
taken to prohibit the sale of imported merchandise with- 
out the payment of a state tax, and the court had held 
this was an unlawful burden on foreign commerce which 
the Constitution had placed exclusively in control of the 
Federal Government. The case remains to this day as 
the foundation of the exclusive control of foreign com- 
merce by the United States as a whole and the inabihty 
of any state to burden it. Would the critics reverse this 
decision and place foreign commerce at the mercy of state 
taxation and necessarily of other state legislation ? It is 
the seaboard states that are chiefly interested in this, but 
they are greatly outnumbered by those of the interior. 
Would they have the selfish interest of interior states con- 
trol, against the general interest of the country as a whole 
in foreign commerce? Would the inland states be willing 
to concede to each seaboard sister the privilege of taking 
toll on all foreign imports as they reach the ports? Re- 
versal of Brown vs Maryland would do it. 

It was the great case of Gibbons vs Ogden, 9 Wheaton, 
1 (182Jf) which applied the same exclusive rule to com- 
merce between the states that Brown vs Maryland had 
applied to foreign commerce. The State of New York 
had granted to the heirs of Robert Fulton the exclusive 
right to navigate the waters of the Hudson River and 
other waters in New York State by steam, and Gibbons 
put a steamboat in the service for the purpose of contest- 
ing this right, claiming that interstate commerce could 
be regulated only by the United States and that no state 
could hamper it. This successful litigation resulted in 
this great case, producing one of Marshall's greatest opin- 



The Supreme Court in the United States 299 

ions. The case is particularly interesting to Georgians 
because of the personality of one of the litigants. Thomas 
Gibbons was a Georgian. In the Revolution he had re^ 
mained loyal to his king, and he was proclaimed a Tory 
and all his property was confiscated. It was afterward 
restored to him and he held high office in Georgia. His 
home was on the Savannah River at White Hall in Chat* 
ham County, which has passed from the ownership of his 
descendants only within the last few years. Frequent ref- 
erence to him as from New Jersey is due to the fact that 
he also had a home in that state, but it was in Georgia 
that he voted and held office. 

Other states had followed New York's example. Geor- 
gia granted to a Georgia corporation the exclusive right 
to navigate the Savannah River. Charleston, then one 
of the great ports of the United States, had among her 
citizens men who were as enterprising as they were 
wealthy. They purchased control of this corporation and 
either carried all freight down the river from Augusta 
through Savannah to Charleston, or charged higher rates 
from Augusta to Savannah than from Augusta to 
Charleston. The decision in Gibbons vs Ogden put an 
end to these unwise and harassing monopolies, once and 
for all established complete and unhampered control by 
the United States of interstate commerce, and was the 
foundation of the court's final holding that Congress like- 
wise exercised full control over navigable waters in the 
United States, even though wholly within the confines of 
one state. 

In this day we are so accustomed to recognizing ad- 
miralty jurisdiction as measured by navigability that it 
is difficult to realize that this was not settled until the 
government had been in existence for two generations. 
In 1825 the court in The Thos, Jefferson, 10 Wheat. U2S, 
had applied the English rule that admiralty jurisdiction 



SOO Alexander R. Lawton 

was limited by the ebb and flow of the tide. The open- 
ing of our great rivers and the great lakes made this 
doctrine clearly inapplicable to what was almost a great 
continent, but it was not until 1852 in The Genessee Chief, 
12 How, UUSy that this opinion was reversed by holding 
that the admiralty jurisdiction extended over the great 
lakes. This was followed shortly by The New World, 16 
How, 469, extending jurisdiction over rivers up to the 
point where navigability ceased. 

Would the extremists reverse Gibbons vs Ogden, de- 
stroy the Interstate Commerce Commission, and leave the 
great transportation systems of the country at the mercy 
of forty-eight states, each squabbling for its own interest 
without regard to the interest of the whole? 

And McCulloch vs Maryland? This case established 
the right of the National Government to create banks, and 
the freedom of these banks from the power which the 
states claimed to tax them, and therefore to destroy 
them. Ohio even took physical possession of all the cash 
of the Ohio Branch of the United States Bank, Osborn vs 
Bank, 9 Wheaton (1824). The reversal of the McCul- 
loch Case would have made impossible the national bank- 
ing system, and later on the Federal Reserve system, 
which every thoughtful citizen not governed solely by 
politics recognizes as the greatest contributing cause to 
the successful raising of the many, many billions of dol- 
lars which enabled this country to contribute to the win- 
ning of the World War. We should have to return to the 
deplorable banking conditions of the middle of the nine- 
teenth century. Who desires this? 

It was only because of a denial by the Supreme Court 
of Federal jurisdiction in a case from Georgia (Bank of 
United States vs Deveaux, 6 Cranch 61, 1810) that the 
fundamental construction of the Constitution in McCul- 
loch vs Maryland (1819) was not announced nine years 



The Supreme Court in the United States 301 

earlier. The court held that a corporation was not a citi^ 
zen of another state within the Constitutional jurisdic- 
tion of controversies between "citizens of different states" 
unless all its stockholders were citizens of the foreign 
state. This decision, which was afterward reversed and 
is no longer the law of the land, caused the dismissal, for 
want of jurisdiction, of a suit by the United States Bank 
against a Georgia sheriff who had seized $2,004.00 of the 
bank's money in the collection of taxes assessed by Geor- 
gia, which at one time reached the prohibitory figure of 
31l^%. If this case had not gone off on a question of jur- 
isdiction, the right of Congress to charter the bank and 
its independence of state laws and freedom from state 
taxation, would have been decided before the expiration 
of the charter of the first United States Bank, and the 
protracted Congressional debates which preceded the 
charter of the second United States Bank would never 
have occurred. When the question was decided in Mc- 
Culloch vs Maryland the decision was unanimous, from a 
court which consisted of two Federalists and five Repub- 
licans. 

An offset to McCulloch vs Maryland, which not only 
upheld the right of the Federal Government to charter a 
bank as an aid to the proper financing of the Government, 
but also settled for all time that a state could place no 
burden upon an agency or instrumentality of the Gov- 
ernment, is Collector vs Day, 11 WallacellS, holding that 
the Federal Government could not tax the salary of a 
state judicial officer. Such is the headnote, but the opin- 
ion of the court is sufficiently broad to protect against 
Federal taxation all instrumentalities and revenues of 
the state. Here there was but one dissent, by Mr. Justice 
Bradley, briefly expressed. The opinion is largely based 
upon McCulloch vs Maryland, reasoning that the protec- 
tion of the Federal Government against state taxation 
necessarily carried with it protection of the states against 



302 Alexander R. Lawton 

Federal taxation. The personnel of the court was the 
same as at the time of the decision two years later in the 
Slaughter-House Cases, and is one of the many state 
rights decisions rendered during the brief period of 
Chase's service as Chief Justice. 

Would they reverse Martin vs Hunter, 1 Wkeaton, SOI^ 
(1816) and Cohens vs Virginia, 6 Wheaton, 26Ji> (1821) 
which sustained the validity of the Twenty-fifth Section 
of the Judiciary Act and left the ultimate decision of con- 
stitutional and other Federal questions to one tribunal, 
even when they arose in state courts? Can you imagine 
the United States as an efficacious Government if each 
state, and therefore the courts of each state, were vested 
with the inalienable power to construe the Constitution in 
its own way? 

The Dartmouth College Case, U Wheaton 518 (1819) 
has been severely attacked but never overruled. It did 
not go as far, however, as the extreme Federalists be- 
lieved and hoped. There was no opportunity to define lim- 
itations of its doctrine during Marshall's lifetime, but in 
February, 1837, when Taney had succeeded him, the 
Charles River Bridge Case, 11 Peters j^20 established the 
fundamental principle that state contracts within the pro- 
tection of the contract-impairment clause should never be 
implied, but must be so clearly expressed that he who 
runs may read. It was held that the grant of a charter 
for a toll bridge was not a contract that the state would 
not thereafter erect or permit the erection of another 
bridge which should greatly diminish, if not entirely de- 
stroy, the revenues of the first structure. This decision 
is reflected in the charter granted by the Georgia Legis- 
lature in 1838, the year following the judgment, to the 
Augusta & Waynesboro (now Augusta & Savannah) Rail- 
road (Georgia Stat 1838, 17^; Sec. 15) in which the 
state, then eager to attract capital into creation of trans- 
portation facilities, solemnly contracted that "no other 



The Supreme Court in the United States 303 

railroad shall be made, to run from the city of Augusta, 
in the same direction, within twenty miles of this road, 
without the assent of said company." This charter con- 
tract has not been observed by the state, competitive roads 
having been chartered and built, and no one has been so 
bold, or shall we say so selfish, as to set up this contract 
as a bar. And this notwithstanding the fact that protec- 
tion of this charter by the contract-impairment clause of 
the Federal Constitution has been repeatedly attacked for 
forty-five years, and as repeatedly sustained. These cases, 
however, involved only that clause of the charter which 
limited the taxation to a specified percentage of income. 
It would have been an interesting experiment, but it is 
not venturesome to say that the eflfort would not have 
been successful. In the atmosphere of eighty years of 
progress the courts would have found some way to avoid 
enforcement of a contract so much opposed to the spirit 
of the times. 

This tendency of the courts was soon shown when a 
similar monopoly granted in a charter was tested by one 
of the few railroads in the United States chartered in the 
earlier days and still operating under its own name its 
original railroad. In 1834 the General Assembly of Vir- 
ginia incorporated the "Richmond, Fredericksburg & 
Potowmack Railroad Company," providing that "in order 
to induce persons to embark their capital in a work of 
great public utility," the General Assembly would not 
for thirty years authorize another railroad, "the 
probable effect of which would be to diminish 

the number of passengers travelling upon 

the railroad authorized .... or to compel the said 
company, in order to retain such passengers, to re- 
duce the passage-money." R. F. & P, RR Co. vs The Lou- 
isa RR Co. 13 How. 71 (1851). The General Assembly 
did afterward authorize the construction of The Louisa 
Railroad Company for a part of the distance, and the 



304 Alexander R. Lawton 

older company sought relief by bill in equity. The judges 
stood six to three; M*Lean, Wayne and Curtis JJ., dis- 
senting. The disinclination of the court to sustain such a 
monopoly during a period of railway development is well 
illustrated by the fact that relief was denied solely on the 
ground, as expressed in the headnote, that the other rail- 
road "might be used exclusively to transport merchan- 
dise" ! Mr. Justice Curtis, one of the ablest lawyers and 
judges that ever sat upon the Great Bench, strongly con- 
tended for sustaining the contract as within the powers of 
the Legislature clearly and expressly set forth and bind- 
ing upon all. Mr. Warren's quotation (ante p. 292) from 
Mr. Justice Holmes on "the felt necessities of the time" 
might well be based on this case. 

The great fundamental decision of the court protect- 
ing the states from encroachment by the United States 
upon their right to exclusive primary control of their 
own alf airs and their own citizens, is the Slaughter-House 
Case, 16 Wallace 36 (1873), It is elaborately reported in 
nearly one hundred pages, and the argument of Hon. 
John A. Campbell, who resigned from the Supreme Bench 
in 1861 following the secession of his state, is very fully 
reported. The majority held, and from that day to this 
the decision has never been modified or seriously ques- 
tioned, that the protection of persons under the Four- 
teenth Amendment against encroachment by the states 
on life, liberty, property, and equal protection of the laws, 
protected only "the privileges and immunities of citizens 
of the United States as distinguished from the privileges 
and immunities of citizens of the states"; and that the 
Amendment did not give a Federal right of review of 
general legislation by the state which might be claimed 
to affect the ordinary privileges and immunities of citi- 
zens of the states. It must be a privilege or immunity 
arising either expressly or by necessary implication out 
of the Constitution of the United States. 



The Supreme Court in the United States 305 

Mr. Warren (III. 261, 272) discusses with great 
acumen the result of this decision and the possible results 
which would have flowed from a holding to the contrary. 
It is one of the great state-rights decisions of the court, 
and it is interesting to note that it was delivered during 
a period of intense Federalism. The dissenting judges 
were Chief Justice Chase, and Justices Field, Swayne, 
and Bradley, opposed by Mr. Justice Miller, who delivered 
the opinion, and Justices Clifford, Davis, Strong, and 
Hunt. 

The Court in Georgia 

Georgia began her life as a state of the American 
Union earnestly favoring a strong government. Sparsely 
populated as she was, it was surprising to find her dele- 
gates to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 favoring 
proportionate representation in the House of Representa- 
tives on the basis of population, as against equal repre- 
sentation for each state ; but her attitude is explained by 
the vast extent of her territory and the vision of her dele- 
gates, who foresaw that ultimately this would bring to 
her greater influence in the councils of the nation. She 
was farthest in distance from Philadelphia, where the 
new Constitution was adopted and presented, and yet 
only Pennsylvania and her two immediate neighbors, Del- 
aware and New Jersey, were ahead of Georgia in ratify- 
ing the new compact. This she did by unanimous vote 
on January 2, 1788, though the draft did not reach Geor- 
gia until October 13, 1787, and it was necessary thereafter 
for the Legislature to order an election, for the election 
to be held, and for the delegates to assemble. Most of 
the states transmitted advice of ratification in purely for- 
mal documents, but John Wereat, President of the Geor- 
gia Convention, added the hope that the prompt compli- 
ance of his state "will tend not only to consolidate the 
Union but promote the happiness of our common 
country." 



306 Alexander R, Lawton 

It was the Supreme Court of the United States that 
gave the first blow to this Federalist sentiment. 

The youngest of the thirteen colonies appears on the 
earliest dockets of the Supreme Court with a frequency 
out of all proportion to her importance, and figures con- 
spicuously in the early development of the important 
problems of that court. 

1. The first case in which opinions are reported was 
a case in which Georgia was plaintiff. (Georgia vs 
Brailsford, 2 DalL W2) 2. The second report of opin- 
ions is on a motion in this same case. (2 DalL U15) 3. 
The third case in which opinions are reported is the con- 
spicuous case of Chisholm v. Georgia (2 DalL J^19) 4. 
This was also the first case in which opinions were deliv- 
ered and judgment rendered on a construction of the con- 
stitution and on the jurisdiction of the court. 5. The 
first case in which a jury was empanelled in the Supreme 
Court was a case in which Georgia was plaintiff, heard 
in 1794 on the merits. (Georgia vs Brailsford, 3 DalL 1) 
6. The first final judgment rendered in the court was the 
judgment on this jury verdict. (Georgia vs Brailsford, 
8 DalL 1) 7. The first time that any justice discussed 
the right to hold a state law unconstitutional (he was 
inclined to recognize the right) was in a Georgia case. 
(Cooper vs Telfair, 4 DalL 1) 

Hampton L. Carson in his Centennial History of the 
Supreme Court (p. 219) says that the first case in which 
the statutes of a state repugnant to the constitution 
have been held to be void is Fletcher v. Peck, which unani- 
mously held that so far as it undertook to disturb rights 
vested in grantees under the Yazoo Sales and by them 
transferred to innocent holders, the Georgia statute re- 
pealing the Yazoo Grant was unconstitutional, null and 
void. But this ignores United States v. Peters (5 Cranch, 
115, 1809) holding null and void a statute of Pennsylva- 



The Supreme Court in the United States 307 

nia which declared the invalidity for want of jurisdiction 
of a judgment of the United States District Court in 
Pennsylvania, and instructed the Governor "by any fur- 
ther means and measures that he may deem necessary to 
protect the persons and properties" of the defendants 
from any process of the Federal Court. 

One of the most important cases which ever came be- 
fore the court is Chisholm, Executor vs. Georgia (2 DalL 
419, 1792) in which a South Carolina plaintiff sought to 
sustain an action of assumpsit against the State of Geor- 
gia by original suit in the Supreme Court. Except for 
silence as to the nature of the claim, this case is very fully 
reported, occupying over sixty pages of the original re- 
port by Dallas, of which over fifty pages are given to the 
opinions; Iredell, J., dissenting (again the dissent is the 
first opinion given) and Blair, Wilson, Gushing, J J., and 
Jay, CJ., concurring. It was held that Par. 1, Sec. 2, Art. 
3 of the Constitution, extending the judicial power of the 
United States "to controversies . . . between a state and 
citizens of another state," and Par. 2 of the same section 
providing that in cases "in which a state shall be a party, 
the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction," gave 
jurisdiction over a suit against a state by a citizen of an- 
other state. The decision was rendered on a motion by 
Edmund Randolph, then Attorney General of the United 
States, for a rule nisi for appearance by the State at the 
next term, or judgment by default and writ of inquiry of 
damages. This motion had been made at the previous 
term; "but, to avoid every appearance of precipitancy, 
and to give the State time to deliberate on the measures 
she ought to adopt, on motion of Mr. Randolph, it was 
ordered by the Court, that the consideration of this motion 
should be postponed to the present term. And now Inger- 
soll and Dallas presented to the Court a written remon- 
strance and protestation on behalf of the State, against 
the exercise of jurisdiction in the cause; but in conse- 



308 Alexander R. Lawton 

quence of positive instructions, they declined taking any 
part in arguing the question." 

Apparently up to this time the Court had delivered its 
two opinions and given its judgment extempore, but now 
the case was "held under advisement by the Court from 
the 5th to the 18th of February, when they delivered their 
opinions seriatim." The order of the Court was that the 
plaintiff should file his declaration, which should be served 
on the Governor and the Attorney General of Georgia, 
and that in default of appearance and cause shown at the 
next term, judgment by default should be entered against 
the State. As the State did not appear, judgment was so 
rendered at the February term, 1794, and a writ of in- 
quiry awarded. The decision immediately created great 
excitement among the sovereign states, so great, appar- 
ently, that the plaintiffs in the six cases brought against 
states did not undertake to brave the dangers and diffi- 
culties involved in efforts to enforce their claims. A foot- 
note (2 DalL 4-80) shows that the writ was never sued out 
and executed. The case was swept from the docket by 
the decision in Hollingsworth vs Virginia (1798) holding 
that the adoption of the Eleventh Amendment deprived 
the court of jurisdiction not only of all future cases, but 
also of those pending. 

The Chisholm Case promptly converted Georgia into 
a strong advocate of state rights, and the tradition of her 
struggles to maintain them against the encroachments of 
the Federal Government, of which the Supreme Court was 
the spokesman, have made the doctrine a part of the po- 
litical bible in Georgia until this day, notwithstanding oc- 
casional straying from the path. It would probably be 
correct to say that no state, whether state rights or Fed- 
eralist in sentiment has continuously walked in the 
straight and narrow path on either side. In instances 
more or less rare, each has temporarily changed her 



The Supreme Court in the United States 309 

alignment on this fundamental question according to the 
immediate needs of the hour ; and surely this is the more 
natural course, and probably the most beneficial in its 
results. 

Today it is not Georgia, but Massachusetts, which files 
its original bill in the Supreme Court attacking the Fed- 
eral Maternity Law as being an unwarranted interfer- 
ence with the rights of the states, though participation by 
the states in carrying out its provisions is not compulsory 
but purely voluntary. Her effort, however, for prompt 
nullification of this law failed because the court held that 
the case did not present a justiciable controversy within 
its jurisdiction. Massachusetts vs Mellon, June 4, 1923, 
43 Supr, Ct Reporter, 597. 

For a long period of our history this issue was critical, 
and permanent alignment on one side or the other on lines 
which were geographical or otherwise well founded was 
natural; but there is now substantially no reason why 
any particular state should be always on the same side of 
this question. This accounts for many of the encroach- 
ments of the Federal Government which in principle are 
most radical, such as the Harrison Narcotic Law and the 
Employers Liability Law, being adopted by practically 
unanimous vote of both houses for the simple reason that 
they were meritoriously designed as the best means of 
remedying admitted evils, means more efficacious than 
the states could or would apply, or in the interest of uni- 
formity of the law. 

Georgia's conflicts with the Supreme Court continued 
to be active and dramatic until the Graves Case in 1834, 
and an academic conflict taking shape in a remarkable 
judicial opinion elsewhere noticed2 was long continued. 



2 Judicial Controversies on Federal Appellate Jurisdiction." President's 
Address, by Alexander R. Lawton, 38 Go. Bar Association. 



310 Alexander R. Lawton 

Georgia has won distinction in this connection which 
I believe is true of no other state. Not until 1872 (White 
vs Hart, 13 Wallace 6^6) was a judgment of any Georgia 
State Court de facto reversed by the Supreme Court of 
the United States, nor was any affirmed. The effort of 
the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse the 
Worcester Case in 1832 had been so futile that apparently 
no Georgia lawyer had for nearly fifty years been so bold 
as to invoke this disputed appellate jurisdiction, which 
had meanwhile been exercised in hundreds of cases from 
other states, though not always peacefully or without pro- 
test. 

It was in this case of White vs Hart that Chief Justice 
Chase dissented on the ground that slavery is "against 
sound morals and natural justice", and pronounced the 
Thirteenth Amendment "retroactive". He stood alone. 
This, so far as I know, is the only promulgation from the 
bench of a high court of justice of the "higher law" which 
Seward proclaimed as superior to the Constitution. 

It was Georgia's noted Senator, John McPherson Ber- 
rien, whose democracy is attested by his service as At- 
torney General to Andrew Jackson, who set forth that a 
concession which permitted the states and their courts to 
construe state laws, even in controversies which concerned 
the rights of the individual under the Federal Constitu- 
tion, equally required that the United States and its courts 
should have the final privilege of construing the Federal 
laws. The Supreme Court has always held that, with 
minor exceptions, it was bound by the construction given 
to a state constitution or a state statute by the highest 
court of that state. What could a government do, how 
much of a government would it be if its Constitution and 
its laws were subject from day to day to different and 
conflicting constructions from thirteen states, now in- 



The Supreme Court in the United States 311 

creased by the growth of the country to forty-eight? 
(Warren II. 366-369). Helpless indeed, pitifully help- 
less! 

The People Are Satisfied 

Reservation of the right to amend the Constitution 
gives to the states and the people continuously available 
means of nullifying any construction of the Constitution 
which may displease them. It was early in the history 
of the court (1798) that they enacted the Eleventh 
Amendment to reverse the decision in Chisholm vs Geor- 
gia by expressly providing that no sovereign state should 
be brought to the bar of the court at the suit of a citizen. 
More than a century passed, however, before this rigiit 
was again exercised. The Sixteenth Amendment giving 
to Congress the right to levy income taxes without appor- 
tionment between the states was the immediate result of 
the court's five-to-four decision to the contrary in the in- 
come tax cases, but it did not become a part of the Con- 
stitution until 1913. Many amendments designed to re- 
verse the court's decisions have been proposed in Con- 
gress, but only twice, with an intervening rest of one hun- 
dred and fifteen years, have they gone farther. Does not 
this tend to show that one of the causes of the court's 
greatness is that its course has met with manifest ap- 
proval of the people whom it serves ? 

Kings and parliaments once made history untram- 
melled by want of power. Since the adoption of our Con- 
stitution it is, in the last analysis, only the people that 
have made or can make our history. The three great de- 
partments of government can control only so long as the 
people permit, and the people have and exercise the right 
to reverse them. The court could not have continued for 
nearly four generations to exercise upon our history at 
least as great an influence as did the executive and the 
Congress, if the people had been unwilling. The people 



312 Alexander R. Lawton 

have not sustained the charge of super-Federalism so fre- 
quently made. They have exercised their right of re- 
versal by constitutional amendment but twice; once to 
secure to each state immunity from suit by an individual 
(the Federal government not being involved) , and later 
to increase the Federal power of taxation. In none of the 
amendments have they touched Federal power as inter- 
preted by the court except to augment it. However bitter 
may have been popular clamor, the court has always come 
safely through it. Whenever sober second thought has 
been able to hold her seat, our great court has had the 
confidence of the people, and it has it today.^ 



3 As this paper is closed Mr. Warren gives us, in the Saturday Evening 
Post of October 13, a masterly analysis of the pending proposals of the critics 
of the court to destroy its power to restrain trespasses by Congress on the rights 
of the individual or the states. As to Congress, this means unrestricted liberty 
to disregard the Constitution and is, of course, super-Federalism. We may soon 
know whether the people have more confidence in Congress than they have in 
the court. 



THE POPULIST MOVEMENT IN GEORGIA* 

By Alex Mathews Arnett, Ph.D. 
North Carolina College For Women 

The decade of the "heart-breaking nineties" was a 
memorable one in the history of Georgia. Out of an eco- 
nomic slough of despond comparable to that of the dark- 
est sixties, arose political storms the most significant as 
well as the most turbulent since the downfall of the car- 
pet-bag regime. 

Momentous changes had been in progress in the life 
of the state during the interval since the Civil War. Es- 
pecially significant had been the rise of the various busi- 
ness elements of the population, and the relative decline 
of the farmer. Socially, economically, and politically, the 
center of gravity had shifted from country to town. The 
standards of polite society no longer emanated from the 
homes of the planters, but rather from those of the mer- 
chant prince, the railway promoter, and the factory presi- 
dent. If some of the planters were still well-to-do it was 
largely because of their fortunate connections in the busi- 
ness world. The great mass of farmers had recovered 
much more slowly than other groups, if indeed they had 
recovered at all, from the general debacle of the sixties. 
Meanwhile, political power had passed into the hands of 
the "town politicians" who had been less zealous in pro- 
moting the interests of their rural constituents than of 
their urban allies. 

The most serious handicap of the farmer was his 
inability to obtain credit except on the most unreasonable 
terms. Left in ruins by the war, he had faced the work 
of restoration with gloomy prospects. Not only was labor 
demoralized and money scarce, but his land, almost his 
only remaining asset, was a drug on the market, and 



1 The writer has not deemed it necessary to document this article, as it 
is based upon the book which he has recently published on the same subject 
(same title as above. Lonemans, Green & Co.. New York). 



314 Alex Mathews Arnett 

remained so for many years ; hence it was not, as a rule, 
acceptable as security for loans. Thus it was that the in- 
famous crop-lien system arose. In order to obtain credit 
for the purchase of supplies during the year, the farmer 
gave a mortgage, or lien, on his forthcoming crop. The 
merchant who "ran" him felt it necessary, because of the 
uncertainty of such business, to charge him considerably 
more than the normal cash prices for such purchases. 
Investigation has shown that time prices in Georgia dur- 
ing the nineties were from 20 to 50 per cent, higher than 
those for cash. As the goods were purchased along 
through the year and the payments were made in the 
fall, the average item ran for less than six months; so 
that the unfortunate victim was paying in effect from 40 
to 100 per cent, interest. The system not only drank up 
his profits and kept him in perpetual debt, but it also 
held him in bondage to his creditor. The latter would 
condition his advances upon the amount of land to be 
planted in cotton, the money crop. Thus, in order to ob- 
tain a maximum credit allowance the farmer was likely 
to give over so much of his land to cotton that he could 
not produce sufficient corn, meat, and other supplies to 
meet his needs. These must then be added to his account 
at ruinous prices. When his crop was gathered it was 
not his own : it must go at once to the merchant. If, as 
was often the case, it proved insufficient to cover his in- 
debtedness, he must renew his bondage to the same man 
for another year. If he were so fortunate as to "pay out" 
he might have the doubtful privilege of choosing another 
creditor. 

This is not a story of negro peonage. The system was 
no respecter of race. The great majority of farmers in 
Georgia, as in other Southern states, remained in the toils 
of debt and dependence from the Civil War to the twen- 
tieth century. Some of the better-to-do made arrange- 
ments a little less onerous, perhaps, with city brokers or 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 315 

factors. But few there were who were able to attain eco- 
nomic independence. 

Considerable numbers of farms were wholly or par- 
tially sacrificed for debt. Many of the largest plantations 
crumbled. Tenancy increased — among whites as well as 
blacks. With the latter, however, it was a change from 
wage-worker to tenant, for the planters were generally 
unable to maintain the wage system. Much of the agri- 
cultural land passed from the hands of farmers to mer- 
chants and other creditors. A few of the large planters 
were able to form fortunate connections in the business 
world and thus to hold their own. These became largely 
identified in interests with the commercial and financial 
groups. The business of farming for the great mass of 
those engaged in it was, under existing conditions, un- 
profitable. 

It should not be inferred from this that the merchants 
and other middlemen were Shy locks. While they profited 
on the whole by the credit situation, they were not with- 
out a share in its detriments. They were, to some extent, 
debtors themselves, and as such were often subjected to 
ungenerous terms. The entire economic system of the 
state and section was dependent upon the "money power" 
of the East. The tremendous losses occasioned by the 
Civil War had reduced the South economically to the posi- 
tion of a tributary province. Bankers and brokers ob- 
jbained credit from the East and passed it on to the mer- 
chants, who parcelled it out to the farmers. The whole 
system was wasteful. The middlemen were more fortu- 
nately placed than the farmers at the bottom, however, 
and they naturally made the most of their opportunities. 

The main reason why the farmer found it so difficult 
to get out of debt was the fact that the prices of his prod- 
ucts were almost constantly falling. From its eminence 
of a dollar a pound at the close of the Civil War, cotton 



316 Alex Mathews Arnett 

had fallen by 1868 to twenty-five cents. The downward 
trend continued to the end of the century. About eighteen 
cents in the local market when the era of home rule began 
in December, 1871, it averaged on the first of that month 
each year about twelve cents during the seventies, nine 
jduring the eighties, and seven during the nineties. In 
1894 it went below five cents a pound. It often happened 
that the more plentiful the harvest, the smaller was the 
total selling price. These losses were offset to some ex- 
tent, though by no means wholly, by the fact that the 
prices of the products which the farmer had to buy were 
also declining. 

The most serious hardship entailed by the long-contin- 
ued fall in prices — one that applied to the debtor class in 
general — ^was that of the appreciation of all standing 
obligations. Dollars were growing larger. It took more 
and more labor to procure them, and it meant a greater 
and greater sacrifice to part with them. On the other 
hand, when the creditor made his collections, while he 
may have received the same number of dollars (aside 
from the interest) that he had loaned, he got a larger 
purchasing power. A debt equivalent to ten bales of cot- 
ton in 1871 would have required eighteen bales to cover 
Jt five years later. The same proportion over a similar 
period held for one contracted in 1889. The dollar appre- 
ciated in purchasing power about seventeen per cent, 
every five years, on an average, from 1865 to 1895. This 
undoubtedly constituted a grievance to the debtor class. 
And it is not surprising that the victims eventually awoke 
to the injustice of the situation, and sought relief through 
united action, political as well as economic. 

Next in importance to the problem of money, credit, 
and prices, was that of transportation. The railroads 
had been guilty of many abuses. To obtain money for 
the initial expense of construction, promoters had sold 
stock to the farmers and townspeople along the proposed 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 317 

routes, had later thrown the roads into bankruptcy, "froz- 
en out" the small stock holders, and reorganized with a 
few insiders in possession and control. They had often 
obtained rights-of-way free or at nominal cost. They 
had been largely exempted from taxation. They had per- 
suaded the state Government to guarantee their bonds 
and in many cases had defaulted, thus forcing their debts 
to be paid from the public treasury. They had watered 
their stocks, paid exorbitant salaries to favored officials, 
awarded lucrative contracts to inside construction com- 
panies, and discriminated in their rates in favor of some 
of the more powerful business interests and against their 
poorer patrons at the way stations. Since the Constitu- 
tional Convention of 1877 some progress had been made 
toward correcting some of these abuses, but the prob- 
lem was still a pressing one. 

The railroads were not the only sinners. Other large 
corporations, especially insurance companies, were guilty 
of somewhat similar offenses. 

In addition to these grievances, upon the backs of the 
farmers fell the burden of taxation out of all proportion 
to the value of their property or their ability to pay. Per- 
sonal property of all kinds escaped its just share. All the 
watches, jewelry, and plate in the city of Atlanta, for ex- 
ample, was valued for this purpose in 1890 at only 
$173,000. The largest distributing center between Balti- 
more and New Orleans, it was credited with only three 
million dollars worth of taxable merchandise in 1890. 
Other towns and cities were even more derelict. Several 
counties, containing numbers of towns and villages sup- 
ported almost wholly by the supply business, reported in 
some years no merchandise at all. Intangible property, 
such as stocks, bonds, etc., was "seldom ever returned . . . 
for taxation,** according to the comptroller-general. 
Nearly half the counties in 1890 reported none. Dealers 
in fertilizers seem to have paid nothing, as a rule, on 



318 Alex Mathews Arnett 

their stocks. Throughout the list, those who were most 
prosperous were most likely to escape the tax gatherer. 
Land bore the chief burden. If it were mortgaged, its 
encumbered owner received no consideration because of 
the fact; besides, he, and not the creditor, paid the tax 
on the mortgage. Meantime the tax rate of the state in- 
creased from 2.5 mills in 1883 to 4 in 1890 and 6.2 in 
1898. 

And what did the farmer get in return? He got roads 
that were well-nigh impassable, schools that ran for two 
or three months in the year, taught by teachers who were 
paid about thirty dollars a month, with even these sal- 
aries nearly always in arrears. 

To some extent, of course, the adversity of the farmer 
was a natural result of the war and of economic condi- 
tions for which governmental policies were only partially 
responsible. In large measure, however, his misfortunes 
were traceable to unwise and unfair policies of local, state, 
and Federal government, and to this extent might have 
been relieved by political action. It is now a well known 
fact that the triumph of the Republican party in 1860 had 
sounded the death knell of the old West and South coali- 
tion in national politics, as a result of which agrarian 
power had waned. Industrial, commercial, and financial 
interests had become dominant. Even in those states of 
the South and West in which the farmers constituted from 
two-thirds to four-fifths of the population, politics was 
controlled to a greater or less extent by urban interests. 
The so-called "Bourbon** Democracy of the South was 
much more bourgeois than Bourbon, if the latter is meant 
to imply a dominant planter aristocracy. 

Of the great political triumvirate in Georgia during 
the seventies and eighties, Colquitt alone was a planter- 
aristocrat ; and he belonged to that type, alluded to above, 
whose interests were more in keeping with those of the 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 319 

business world than with those of the mass of farmers. 
Gordon and Brown were both promoters of railroads and 
other corporate activities. Either Colquitt or Gordon held 
the governorship of Georgia during the major part of 
the interval between 1872 and 1890; either Gordon or 
Brown held one of the United States Senatorships 
throughout the period, and Colquitt held the other after 
the expiration of his term as governor in 1882. Of alj 
the governors, with the single exception of Stephens, who 
served for only a few months, none was personally repre- 
sentative of the interests of the small or middle-class 
farmers, and only Colquitt represented the planters. The 
same was true of the Senators. Among the Congress- 
men, thirty were business men or lawyers or both ; three 
were planters ; and one was a combination of small farm- 
er, physician and preacher. Even in the legislature, the 
farmers remained a diminishing minority. 

What was the reaction of the farmers toward this 
situation? 

Not until the rise of the Farmers' Alliance in the late 
eighties did any very large percentage of them seem to 
feel their loss of political power; or to appreciate the 
possible relationships between such a loss on the one hand 
and their economic adversity on the other. True, there 
had been a movement in the late seventies, stimulated by 
statesmen of the old school such as Toombs, by political 
free lances like Felton, and aided somewhat by the 
Grange, which had secured the provisions in the Consti- 
tution of 1877 for the regulation of railroads. But the 
practical results of this had been rather disappointing. 
The wave of independency which had swept over the 
northern part of the state in the late seventies and influ- 
enced somewhat the party split of 1880, had shown evi- 
dences of economic dissent in some localities; but on the 
whole it had been more concerned with ring rule as such 



320 Alex Mathews Arnett 

than with the economic consequences of ring rule. It had 
lost its force by 1882. Thenceforth until the end of the 
decade there was scarcely a thought of revolt against the 
existing regime. 

The fetishism attaching to the Democratic party be- 
came a veritable religion of the New South. The party 
that had battled for Southern rights, and had redeemed 
Anglo-Saxon civilization from the infamy of negro-carpet- 
bag rule, inevitably became the party of white respecta- 
bility. One scarcely dared to question its supreme right 
to rule. Almost equally sacred were the heroes who had 
led the battalions in grey or had served state or Confed- 
eracy in the times that tried men*s souls. Thus it is not 
surprising that a sort of oligarchy was established. Be- 
tween the great "triumvirate" and the "court-house 
rings," the slates were fixed, and the "sovereign people" 
could be surely counted on to do the rest. A Democrat 
was a Democrat, and a hero was a hero. There seems to 
have been little realization that men in different walks 
of life, however honest, view practical problems from dif- 
ferent angles. To be sure, the party was supposed to 
stand for certain "principles," which the hero was sup- 
posed to embody; but the relation between those "prin- 
ciples" and the every-day affairs of a changing world 
was exceedingly vague in the mind of the average voter. 
Nowhere is there better illustration of Jefferson's theory 
that a political thunder-storm is necessary in a democracy 
at least once every generation. 

It came. The Farmers* Alliance started it. This 
order was a natural outgrowth of existing conditions 
among the agricultural population of the country. It 
was similar in many ways to the Grange, which had flour- 
ished in the early seventies. Unhke the latter, however, 
it had no single founder and did not begin as a national 
organization with well-formed plans for its propagation. 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 321 

Like Topsy, it "just grew." In numerous backwoods com- 
munities widely scattered over the country, between 1874 
and 1886, Alliances, Unions, Wheels, and what-nots 
sprang up spontaneously. Each of these became a mother 
order, multiplying into neighboring communities, coun- 
ties, states, meeting each other, amalgamating, and thus 
developing almost unconsciously into a great nation-wide 
movement. By 1890 the Southern Alliance, which re- 
mained a separate organization though affiliated with 
that of the North and West, claimed three million 
members. 

The Alliance appeared in Georgia in 1887. By the 
summer of 1889 it had well over two thousand lodges and 
more than a hundred thousand members. Rural school 
houses and other meeting places were periodically filled 
with eager and indignant farmers. Occasionally barbe- 
cues and picnics brought thousands from surrounding 
communities to hear the itinerant "lecturer" of the order 
discuss agrarian problems. 

In seeking a solution of these, the organization first 
turned to business co-operation. In various localities fer- 
tilizers and other supplies were purchased jointly through 
agents, appointed by the county organizations. Some- 
times crops were disposed of in a similar way. Such 
agencies soon led to the state exchange, a much more 
ambitious, and for a time a very successful, enterprise. 
In so far as the members were able to break the fetters 
of the lien and avail themselves of the "co-op" service, 
they were saved as much as twenty-five to fifty per cent, 
it is said, on the purchase of supplies and considerable 
sums on the sale of their products. Soon co-operative 
stores, warehouses and gins were springing up like mush- 
rooms. Over-rapid expansion, difficulty of obtaining 
credit, inability of many members to break away from 
lien obligations, strenuous opposition from the business 



322 Alex Mathews Arnett 

world, and in some cases incompetence or dishonesty on 
the part of those in charge carried a number of these ven- 
tures upon the rocks. A considerable number of the 
stronger ones weathered the storms, however, until the 
panic of 1893, at which time the Alliance itself was going 
to pieces from political dissensions. 

It seems to have been the original purpose of the order 
to keep out of politics. While discussion of political and 
politico-economic problems early became an important 
phase of the meetings, the constitution required that such 
be done "in a strictly non-partisan spirit." A great many 
farmers are said to have refused to become members until 
assured that the order would not interfere with their poli- 
tics. The more they considered and discussed their prob- 
lems, however, the more general became the feeling that 
if the f armer*s wrongs were to be righted political action 
was necessary. By the summer of 1889 it became appar- 
ent that the Georgia Democracy was in for a "house clean- 
ing." There seems to have been virtually no sentiment at 
that time in favor of a third party. One was not thought 
to be needed. The farmers were in the majority : let them 
rise up in their might and take possession of their own 
party. 

Similar plans were developing in other states. In 
fact it was rapidly becoming a nation-wide movement. 
As some of the most fundamental problems with which 
the farmers were concerned called for Federal rather than 
state action, and as their organizations had gained a tre- 
mendous following throughout the country (except in 
the East) , they naturally realized the possibilities of the 
situation. In December, 1889, a monster gathering was 
held at St. Louis at which the Alliances and other agra- 
rian orders and also the Knights of Labor^ were repre- 



2 The Knights of Labor, then a declining order, supported the movement 
and labored in vain for an effective union of farmers and industrial laborers in 
politics. The American Federation of Labor withheld its support from the 
nsrarians. 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 323 

sented. The purpose of the meeting was to agree on a 
plan of political action. A few of the delegates favored 
the immediate formation of a farmer-labor party, but the 
great majority preferred to work within the old parties. 
Hence a platform was drawn up to be used as a "yard- 
stick" for measuring candidates. It was agreed among 
the delegations from most of the orders represented, in- 
cluding those of the Southern Alliance, that to receive the 
approval of these orders, candidates must declare them- 
selves in favor of : 

"Free and unlimited coinage of silver'* (in order to increase 
the circulating medium and thus make prices higher and credit 
easier and stay the appreciation of dollars and debts) ; 

Abolition of national banks and substitution of government 
paper for bank notes (to break the hold of the "money power" upon 
the volume of money in circulation, and enable the government to 
regulate this volume with a view to stabilizing prices and credit 
conditions) ; 

Laws to prevent speculation upon the produce exchanges; 

Government ownership of railroads; 

Revision of taxation, Federal, state and local (so that it 
"shall not be used to build up one interest or class at the expense of 
another"). 

To these demands the Southern Alliance added an- 
other which provided for a Federal system of rural cred- 
its under which the farmer might store "non-perishable" 
products in government warehouses and borrow money 
from the government up to a certain percentage of their 
value. Known as the "sub-treasury plan," this scheme 
became the chief target for those who opposed the move- 
ment and the chief source of discord among Alliancemen 
themselves. 

News of the happenings at St. Louis only further stim- 
ulated an already heated campaign in Georgia. It was 
evident by the summer of 1889 that the next governor 
would probably be a man of agrarian interests or sympa- 
thies. Two candidates were already in the field — ^W. J. 
Northen and L. F. Livingston. Both were large plant- 



324 Alex Mathews Arnett 

ers. Both had been active in state politics for some years, 
but had been essentially conservative. Each had been 
president in turn of the State Agricultural Society, a ven- 
erable and conservative body. Both had embraced the 
Alliance movement, Livingston being at that time presi- 
dent of the state organization. He was the more radical 
of the two, ardently advocating the full program of the 
Alliance including the sub-treasury of which he was one 
of the authors. Northen was undoubtedly interested in 
the welfare of the farmers, but he was temperamentally 
conservative. He was not in favor of the sub-treasury or 
government ownership of railroads. In state matters, he 
felt that the tax system might be judiciously revised, the 
public schools improved, and perhaps some further meas- 
ures taken toward railway regulation. Contrary to Liv- 
ingston, he would have granted the roads the right of 
appeal to the courts from the decisions of the railway 
commission. The more radical element in the Alliance 
favored Livingston ; the more conservative wing favored 
Northen. The latter in time also obtained the support 
of most of the newspapers and many of the leading poli- 
ticians. 

When the Alliance first began to move toward political 
action, it was strongly urged by the press and by con- 
servatives generally to keep out of politics. Even among 
its own members there was much opposition to such a 
move, but gradually the movement gathered strength 
until it became irresistible. Meantime, sensing the trend 
of affairs, most of the papers and many of the politicians 
fell in line. Others continued to oppose any sort of com- 
promise with the "radicals." 

In addition to the St. Louis platform, the Alliance de- 
manded of candidates that they favor: 

Enlargement of the powers of the railway commis- 
sion to cover other public service corporations, and strict 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 325 

enforcement of the laws against discriminations and 
against interchange of stock among competing com- 
panies ; 

Abolition of the iniquitous convict-lease system, plac- 
ing the convicts on the public roads ; 

Revision of the tax system with a view to lightening 
the burden on the masses of the people; 

Extension of the public school system ; 

Laws to insure fair primaries and elections. 

When the campaign was waxing warmest in the sum- 
mer of 1890, it was suddenly announced that the Northen- 
Livingston controversy had been settled. At a confer- 
ence in Atlanta among party leaders, it had been agreed 
that Livingston should retire from the gubernatorial race, 
leaving Northen a clear field, and that Livingston should 
become the candidate for Congress from the Atlanta 
district. 

But the storm was not over. There were races for 
Congress, races for the legislature, races for the various 
local offices. In most cases the real elections were the 
Democratic primaries. These were not entirely new: 
they had been held occasionally in some localities for a 
decade. It was claimed, however, that they had rarely 
amounted to much ; had been called, if at all, at the times 
when the farmers were busiest ; had been given little pub- 
licity ; and had nearly always resulted in "rubber-stamp- 
ing" the slate. It was different now that "the people" 
were awake : primaries were insistently demanded on all 
hands, excepting a few cases in which the incumbents 
were rather generally acceptable. Almost every issue of 
the dailies and of the county weeklies carried lists of 
speaking engagements or of joint debates between rival 
candidates. There were glowing accounts of such gath- 



326 Alex Mathews Arnett 

erings — "the largest ever known in the town !" "the most 
enthusiastic audience in years." Farmers drove ten or 
twenty miles over all but impassable roads to hear "lively 
Lon Livingston" or "eloquent Tom Watson." 

It was a sweeping victory for the Alliance. In six 
out of ten Congressional districts, the incumbents lost 
their seats; in the other four, they made their peace with 
the "embattled farmers" via the less radical element. 
The Alliance controlled the state convention, chose the 
governor, wrote the platform, named three-fourths of the 
senators and four-fifths of the representatives. The as- 
sembly which convened in November was greeted by the 
press — with mingled emotions no doubt — as THE FARM- 
ERS' LEGISLATURE. "As in the days of Jackson," de- 
clared an ardent AUianceman, "the people have come to 
power." 

But as events proved "the people" were not of one 
mind. There was considerable difference in purpose be- 
tween the compromise element which included many of 
the old-line politicians and the more radical wing which 
had sought a more thorough house cleaning and insisted 
upon the full program of the Alliance. The record of the 
Farmers' Legislature and of the new Congressman-elect 
would determine the truth of the prediction made during 
the campaign by those of the old guard who had opposed 
the entire movement that a third party was brewing. Al- 
ready the "radicals" in several of the Western states had 
abandoned their traditional Republicanism, and were be- 
ginning to urge the Southern dissenters to renounce the 
name Democracy and join hands with them in the new- 
born "People's Party." The great majority in Georgia 
at this time said wo, and their brethren in other Southern 
states who had accomplished similar feats within the 
party were inclined to agree with them. A growing mi- 
nority, however, felt that too much compromising had 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 327 

been done, that the movement was being betrayed, and 
that its purposes could be realized only through a new 
party. 

Despite the strong opposition of the "yard-stick" ele- 
ment, the new legislature was organized by the compro- 
mise group. It elected General Gordon, the outgoing Gov- 
ernor, to the United States Senate, despite the fact that 
he was not in full accord with the St. Louis program and 
was known to be a friend to the railroads and other cor- 
porate interests. Numerous bills were introduced, touch- 
ing almost every phase of the popular grievances within 
the province of the state government. Several important 
laws were enacted, among which were the following: — 
The power of the railway commission to fix rates, which 
had been called into question, was confirmed, and its juris- 
diction was extended to cover express and telegraph com- 
panies. Corporations doing a banking business, author- 
ized under the laws of Georgia, were required to publish 
quarterly statements; to maintain reserves of not less 
than 25 per cent, of their call deposits ; were forbidden to 
make loans to their officers without good collateral, or 
likewise to any one person to an amount exceeding ten 
per cent, of their capital and surplus. The system of 
state inspection of fertilizers, which seems to have been 
quite inadequate, was somewhat extended. For the bene- 
fit of industrial labor, corporations were forbidden to 
maintain a black list, and railroads were forbidden to 
work their employees more than twelve hours in twenty- 
four except in cases of unavoidable delays. In the inter- 
ests of the negroes, an agricultural and mechanical col- 
lege for colored youth was established with the aid of the 
Federal government. 

This record to some was quite gratifying ; to others it 
was very disappointing. To the latter it seemed a weak 
compromise on the major issues. The insistent demand 



328 Alex Mathews Arnett 

for effective laws to prevent such things as combinations 
in restraint of competition, robbery of innocent investors 
by reorganization schemes, overcapitalization, and dis- 
crimination against the patrons of way stations had not 
been met. The anaconda lien and mortgage system re- 
mained unscathed. Tax burdens were to be no more 
equitably apportioned than before. Some of these ques- 
tions the state government alone could not wholly solve. 
Had it done all it could? Those who thought not were 
beginning to urge that the "wool-hat boys" must now 
part company with the "silk-hat bosses." 

The records of the Alliance Congressmen stimulated 
an even more heated controversy than did those of the 
legislators. The question which they had to face at the 
outset was whether they should act in harmony with their 
party organization at Washington, which on the whole 
was little in sympathy with the Alliance program; or 
should maintain, together with the Alliancemen from 
other states, a certain independence and solidarity. Tom 
Watson alone of the Georgia delegation refused to enter 
the Democratic caucus, but went instead into one made 
up of Alliancemen of all three parties (including the new 
People's Party) . This brought down upon him the bit- 
terest condemnation on the one hand and the highest glo- 
rification on the other. He had been elected as a Demo- 
crat and had become a "traitor" to his party, said the 
regulars. He should at least have made every reasonable 
effort to accomplish reform within the fold of the old 
party before withdrawing from its councils, declared the 
moderates. He was simply playing politics with a lot of 
half -crazed third-partyites, said others. Watson held, on 
the other hand, that the Democratic machine, like that of 
the Republicans, was controlled by conservatives in league 
with the great corporate interests, and would give little 
heed to the reformers unless they held themselves in posi- 
tion to demand it. Principles, he said, were more impor- 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 329 

tant than party names. He had been elected as a Demo- 
crat; but what was more important to him, he had been 
chosen by his constituents in preference to a regular 
party man because he stood for a certain program. He 
felt it his duty, therefore, regardless of party lines to 
join with others who stood for the same program. The 
majority of the Alliance Democrats remained regular. 

Although the Democrats were in control of Congress, 
thanks to the popular upheaval of 1890, they could accom- 
plish little, — partly because of the fact that the Presi- 
dency was still in the hands of the Republicans, partly 
because of the lack of unity within their own party. It is 
a well-known fact that both the old parties were at that 
time hopelessly divided on the major questions of the day. 
Even on the tariff question, which was the one important 
economic issue on which there was a fairly clear division, 
neither party was a unit. The highest tariff in our his- 
tory up to that time had been enacted by the preceding 
Congress. This the Democrats were pledged to reduce, 
but because of the influence of protected interests within 
their ranks they were in poor position to redeem their 
pledge. On other issues their position was even more 
hopeless. And the Republican party certainly offered no 
better alternative to the disaffected elements. It was in- 
deed a situation which made a third party almost 
inevitable. 

In a series of conventions held by the Alliance and 
other agrarian orders and attended by delegates from 
some of the lesser labor organizations during 1891 and 
1892, plans were perfected for the launching of the na- 
tional People's Party. Their platform, adopted at Omaha 
in July, 1892, condemned in extravagant language the al- 
leged enslavement of the masses by the heartless Money 
Power and the prostitution of the old parties to the ser- 
vice of the oppressors. No wonder the smug business man 



330 Alex Mathews Arnett 

took alarm. But the most radical feature of the platform 
was the language in which it was couched. Except for 
the addition of planks calling for a graduated income tax, 
postal savings banks, abolition of private detective agen- 
cies, popular election of Senators, and the Australian bal- 
lot system, the program was virtually the same as that 
adopted by the Alliance at St. Louis three years before. 
It was scarcely more radical than that of the Bryan Dem- 
ocracy four years later. The convention nominated James 
B. Weaver of Iowa for President and James G. Field of 
Virginia for Vice President. 

In the meantime the new party had developed consid- 
erable strength in Georgia. Scores of Populist weeklies 
were springing up, the most important being the People's 
Party Paper, established in Atlanta in 1891. It published 
weekly letters from Watson, who before the close of his 
first session in Congress was clearly in line with the new 
party. These were eagerly read and hotly discussed by 
thousands of farmers and some of the poorer classes in 
the towns, and were not unnoticed by others. He de- 
scribed the situation in Washington in his characteristic 
style, forceful, pungent, and often acrid. Whether a 
Judas or a Moses, he was the incarnation of Populism. 
To thousands he was the essence of all that was wicked ; 
to thousands of others he was a veritable god. In Augusta 
he was burned in effigy as a traitor ; in many a rural com- 
munity he was worshipped as the greatest popular leader 
of modern times. 

As may well be imagined, the campaign was extremely 
turbulent. The new party sought to induce Watson to ac- 
cept the gubernatorial nomination, but he felt it his duty 
to seek a referendum from his district on his record in 
Congress. He was able to point to the introduction of 
bills covering practically every phase of the Alliance pro- 
gram, though few of them had ever come back from the 



THE Pqpulist Movement in Georgia 331 

committee room. He did succeed in the next session in 
attaching a rider to the appropriations bill which estab- 
lished the first rural free delivery. He had burst a bomb 
shell in the House by publicly denouncing the shams and 
moral laxity of Congress. This had made him either a 
crank and a demagogue or a fearless and upright states- 
man. Failing to induce him to head the state ticket, the 
party turned to W. L. Peek, a "real dirt farmer" and a 
man of ability, but not a good campaigner. It endorsed 
the Omaha platform and called for the completion of the 
state program advocated by the Alliance. Stormy scenes 
were enacted in the local meetings as well as the state 
convention of this order. In some of the counties the new 
party was endorsed, in others the body remained neutral 
as an organization, and in others still it condemned the 
use of the order for partisan purposes. While the state 
convention did not directly support the Populists, it 
showed evident Populist leanings. The chief strength of 
the new party was among the small farmers. Most of the 
large planters and nearly all of the townspeople, except 
in some working-class wards, remained Democratic. Di- 
vided on the issues, the Democrats placed chief emphasis 
upon tradition, party loyalty and the danger of dividing 
the white vote. They also attacked the sub-treasury 
scheme and government ownership of railroads. 

It became evident early in the campaign that the 
negroes would hold the balance of power. The Populists 
sought to enlist their support through the colored Al- 
liance. They might have had better success had they 
been willing to effect a general fusion with the Republi- 
cans, but they were evidently afraid of injuring their 
cause with the whites. The Democrats had had experi- 
ence in dealing with the colored vote. They had learned 
how to eliminate it when necessary in reconstruction 
times, and how to utilize it in the years of party schism 
a decade later. Tradition, custom and election laws were 



332 Alex Mathews Arnett 

all in their favor. A supremely desirable end was thought 
to justify questionable means. Thus intimidation, brib- 
ery, ballot-box stuffing and manipulation of the count, 
while deplored, were thought to be lesser evils than the 
loss of political control by the "respectable" elements. 
Many of the planters, owners of turpentine stills and other 
employers took their "hands" to the polls and voted them 
in gangs. In some of the towns and cities, all-night revel- 
ries were held for the darkies on the night before election. 
Barbecue was served with whiskey and beer by the barrel. 
Next morning the dusky revelers were marched to the 
polls by beat of drum, carefully guarded lest some desert 
in search of another reward. In some of the cities bands 
of them were taken from one polling place to another and 
voted under different names. According to the testimony 
produced in the Watson-Black contested election case, 
negroes were brought over from South Carolina in four- 
horse wagons and voted at various precincts in Augusta. 
The total vote in that city was double the number of legal 
voters, eighty per cent, of it being Democratic. Some- 
what similar methods were employed in the smaller 
towns. In the country, a considerable number of Popu- 
list precincts were thrown out on technicalities. The 
Democrats were not the only sinners, to be sure ; but they 
were more resourceful, and hence more successful at the 
game. 

The results showed a sweeping Democratic victory. 
Northen, the Democratic candidate for governor, defeat- 
ed Peek two to one. Only fourteen counties and none of 
the Congressional districts went Populist. In the country 
at large, the Democrats gained the Presidency and both 
houses of Congress. But Weaver polled over a million 
popular votes and gained 22 electoral votes. 

During the next few years, economic conditions great- 
ly favored the growth of dissent. The most disastrous 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 333 

panic in our history occurred in 1893, and was followed 
by a general depression, unusually prolonged and severe. 
Prices, already at the lowest point of the century up to 
that time, continued to drop until near the close of the 
decade, farm products going lowest. Wheat went below 
fifteen cents a bushel on the farm, and cotton below five 
cents a pound. This was clearly below the cost of pro- 
duction ; hence the farmers sank more deeply in debt, and 
the dollars in which their debts were measured grew still 
larger in terms of their products. Tenancy increased. 
Credit accounts were so reduced that many commodities 
formerly regarded as necessities became luxuries, either 
dispensed with altogether or indulged but rarely. The 
poor of the towns and cities, where unemployment be- 
came distressing, were no better off. 

The divisions within the national Democracy made it 
impossible for the Federal government to offer any sub- 
stantial relief. Despite the strenuous efforts of Presi- 
dent Cleveland to obtain a lowering of the tariff, the pro- 
tected interests were able to so mutilate the bill that it 
was little improvement over the one which it supplanted. 
Cleveland refused to sign it, permitting it to become a 
law without his signature. The act of 1890 providing for 
limited use of silver for enlarging the circulating medium 
was repealed and no measure of relief in this pressing 
field was provided. Efforts to pass a free-coinage bill 
failed, meeting almost as much opposition in Democratic 
ranks as in Republican. Cleveland was a "sound money" 
man, and had no adequate plan as a substitute for silver 
or greenbacks. As the world's gold supply was not in- 
creasing at that time in proportion to the output of goods 
and the demands of trade, some scheme for enlarging the 
currency beyond that which the existing system admit- 
ted was obviously needed, though it is still a question 
whether a resort to unlimited coinage of silver would 
have been a proper remedy. At any rate it seemed to 



334 Alex Mathews Arnett 

offer a hope to the toiling masses. It was naturally op- 
posed by the creditor class. As the economic depression 
spread its gloom into the ranks of the lesser business 
classes, the spirit of dissent likewise spread, and with it 
the dissatisfaction with the policies (or lack of policies) 
of the major parties. 

In a number of by-elections in Georgia during 1893, 
safe Democratic majorities of the year before were turned 
into Populist victories. The Democrats became thorough- 
ly alarmed. A council of war was held in Atlanta, as a 
result of which Governor Northen sent a note to Presi- 
dent Cleveland describing the deplorable conditions in 
the state and the ominous political reverses, and begging 
him to make some public statement "as to the proper 
policy to be pursued by Congress upon questions affecting 
the stringency of the times and the needs of the people." 
As a matter of fact Cleveland had no constructive policy 
other than tariff reduction, and that would not have been 
sufficient by any means even if he had been able to induce 
Congress to give it a fair trial. Cleveland was doubtless 
honest in his purposes and innocent of the charges that 
he was "in league with the Money Power." He was un- 
consciously influenced no doubt by the prevailing senti- 
ment in his home section (the East), and viewing the 
situation from the angle of his section with little appreci- 
ation of actual conditions in the South and West, his 
judgment was naturally warped. In his reply to Northen, 
for example, he declared that he would not favor any 
measure which would bring about "a shrinkage in the 
purchasing power of the dollar." He seems not to have 
realized that the purchasing power had been expanding 
for a generation, and that this had been a growing hard- 
ship upon those classes who were least able to bear it. 

The failure of the Democratic administration in Wash- 
ington to provide adequate measures of relief for the dis- 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 335 

tressful conditions was reacting strongly in favor of the 
Populists. The record of the Georgia legislature had 
been little more satisfactory to dissenters than that of 
Congress. "Two years ago," said Watson in the opening 
speech of the Populist state convention of 1894, "we were 
fed upon the ambrosia of Democratic expectations. To- 
day we are gnawing the cobs of Democratic reality." In 
addition to their former demands, the Populists now 
called for a state income tax. They selected Judge James 
K. Hines to oppose W. Y. Atkinson for the governorship. 
The election was like the preceding one except more so — 
and except for the remarkable Populist gains. After 
considerable study of the available evidence, the writer 
is convinced that with a fair election and count the Popu- 
lists would have carried the state. On the face of the re- 
turns they polled 44.5 per cent, of the vote, carried 46 
counties, elected 47 representatives and five senators. In 
the country at large, they polled a million and a half 
votes, elected six United States Senators, seven Congress- 
men, 153 state senators, and 315 representatives. The 
Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress, the 
Populists forming a balance of power in the Senate. 

It was becoming evident that the two old parties could 
not go on indefinitely in their existing state of confusion 
and uncertainty, dodging the great issues of the day, seek- 
ing to hold all shades of opinion and interest with ambig- 
uous promises and appeals to sentiment and tradition 
while genuine grievances went unrelieved. It was like- 
wise evident that the national Democracy, despite its pow- 
erful hold upon the South, could not continue to flout that 
section and take its vote for granted. The Cleveland 
Democracy represented a coalition between the creditor 
and commercially dominant East and the agrarian and 
debtor South, the latter occupying a distinctly subordinate 
position. Republicanism represented an alliance of the 
industrial and creditor East with the agrarian and debtor 



336 Alex Mathews Arnett 

West. It was obvious that under existing circumstances 
the South and West might both hope to gain by a break- 
ing up of the old alignments and the formation of a new 
union of West and South. This largely explains the party 
revolution of 1896. Whether the change would have 
been effected had it not been for the pressure of Populism, 
however, may well be questioned. Populism was at once 
a "menace" and a promise. It was breaking the Repub- 
lican hold upon the West and endangering the Democratic 
hold upon the South. If, on the other hand, the national 
Democracy could swallow the new party, it might save 
itself in the South and gain sufficient strength in the 
West to come out triumphant. The crucial point would 
be the Northcentral states, partly still agrarian but rap- 
idly becoming industrial. And they decided the issue. 

When the Democrats nominated Bryan on a Populistic 
platform they sealed the doom of the People's Party, al- 
though they did not effect its immediate death. A consid- 
erable element among the Populists, known as the "mid- 
dle-of-the-roaders," questioned the sincerity and hon- 
esty of the new Democracy. Its "fusion" looked like a 
Jonah-and-the-whale proposition. It had placed a New 
England national banker on the ticket with Bryan, and 
when the Populists offered to accept Bryan but urged 
that Watson be substituted for Sewall as running mate, it 
had turned a deaf ear. 

The South furnished greater opposition to fusion than 
did the West. In the former the new party was engaged 
in a struggle for local reforms which it was unwilling to 
abandon. Then too, the "third party" there was really a 
second party so far as the great mass of white voters 
were concerned ; and to abandon it might mean a return 
to the political stagnation of the eighties. And finally, 
like all great popular movements. Populism had brought 
to the fore, along with its more conscientious leaders, a 



The Populist Movement in Georgia 337 

host of hungry office-seekers who were anxious to con- 
tinue the fight for the loaves and fishes. 

Thus in Georgia, as in other Southern states, "fusion 
failed to fuse," at least for a time. The state campaign 
of 1896 was almost as hotly contested as that of 1894. 
The People's Party this time embraced the prohibition 
movement and made Seaborn Wright its standard bearer. 
It also continued its war upon the machine and its de- 
mands for economic reform. But the results showed that 
its force was waning. It lost 11,000 votes from its total 
in 1894, and carried fifteen fewer counties. The party 
continued to put out a state ticket until 1902, but its 
strength continued to dwindle. 

But Populism did not die with the People's Party. It 
has never ceased to be a vital force in the politics of the 
state. To many of the old guard no doubt it came to 
mean little more than a personal attachment for Watson 
and other leaders. To a great many others, however, it 
meant a life-long fight for the rights of the plain people. 
With the rise of a new generation and the growth of an 
urban working class, factional divisions have become 
much more complex. Unfortunately the popular cause 
has too often been confused by cross currents of race and 
religious prejudice, issues have been obscured by person- 
alities ; but progress has been made toward the correction 
of old grievances. 

It was rather from a stroke of fortune than from the 
work of politicians that prices, credit and business con- 
ditions rebounded from their nadir in the nineties. The 
discovery of new supplies of gold in Alaska and South 
Africa about 1897, together with the perfection of the 
cyanide process of gold extraction, resulted in a great in- 
crease in the world's output of the yellow metal, and hence 
reheved the gold famine. The Spanish-American War 
brought new issues of government bonds and new issues 



338 Alex Mathews Arnett 

of bank notes. The volume of money increased; prices 
rose. The long winter of economic adversity gave place 
to the spring of reviving prosperity. 

The Federal Reserve banking system has helped some- 
what to stabilize credit conditions; its provisions for 
farmers* loans, while very inadequate, seem to be a step 
in the right direction. But the fundamental problems of 
money, prices and credit remain to be solved. The lien 
system remains, though it has become less common and 
the exorbitant differences between cash and credit prices 
have largely disappeared. Taxation is more equitably 
distributed than formerly. The demands for a Federal 
income tax, popular election of Senators, rural free deliv- 
ery, postal savings banks, better roads and schools, gen- 
eral primaries under state supervision, abolition of the 
convict lease system, and prohibition have been realized. 
The abuses of railroads and other corporations have been 
mitigated perhaps, but not cured. Thus the popular 
awakening of the nineties, though it did not solve all the 
problems with which it was concerned, at least was not in 
vain. 



A SPANISH SETTLEMENT IN CAROLINA, 1526. 

By J. G. Johnson, M. A. 

University of Georgia. 

During the sixteenth century Espafiola, the name 
given to the island of Haiti by Columbus, was the center 
from which numerous expeditions sailed to the lands lying 
to the south, west, and north, on their errands of discov- 
ery, exploration, conquest, and colonization. That the 
early attempts at planting colonies on the Atlantic main- 
land were unsuccessful does not detract from their inter- 
est. Long before the English undertaking on Roanoke 
Island had ended in tragedy, thriving Spanish colonies 
existed far to the north of St. Augustine. To San Felipe 
on Port Royal Sound came Spanish soldiers and farmers 
in 1566, to be followed soon afterward by Jesuit and Fran- 
ciscan missionaries. This settlement existed until 1686, 
but exactly forty years before its establishment Spaniards 
from Espafiola founded San Miguel de Guadalpe, near 
the present dividing line of the two Carolinas. It is 
highly interesting to note that negro slaves were first 
introduced, not in Virginia, but in Carolina. Likewise 
the first recorded instance of shipbuilding on the coasts of 
what is now the United States occurred at or near the 
mouth of Cape Fear River. 

In 1520 there lived in Espafiola one Lucas Vasquez de 
Ayllon who was known widely as the licentiate Ayllon by 
the Spanish chroniclers of the period. He had gone to 
the Indies with Ovando in 1502.^ Early in 1520 he went 
to Cuba as a commissioner from the Audiencia of Santo 
Domingo, the object of his errand being to attempt to 
allay the wrath of Governor Velasquez of that island, 
who was at that time fitting out an expedition to proceed 
against Cortes in Mexico. Ayllon protested against the 
activities of Narvaez, the leader of the expedition, but to 



1 Gomara. La hiatoria general de las Indiaa (Anvers, 1554), lib. iii, cap. 
▼iL 



340 J. G. Johnson 

no avail.2 Four years later we hear of him as one of 
the auditors of Espanola, and "though possessed of 
wealth, honors, and domestic felicity, aspired to the glory 
of discovering some new land, and making it the seat of 
a prosperous colony." It is most probable that he was 
inspired by the successes of Cortes in Mexico, and filled 
with zeal to win honor for himself and a principality for 
Spain in the "Northern Mystery." Notwithstanding these 
martial ambitions he possessed none of the attributes of 
the adelantado or conquistador. He was a man of no 
mean order of intelligence, but according to a contempo- 
rary who was also a personal acquaintance, he had never 
"donned a corselet or borne a sword to earn his wages 
therewith."^ 

As early as December, 1520, Ayllon had fitted out a 
caravel, and under the command of Francisco Gordillo, 
dispatched it to the north with instructions to proceed 
until the mainland was reached.** After some time this 
vessel fell in with another commanded by Pedro de 
Quexos, who had been sent to capture cannibalistic Caribs 
to sell as slaves. Quexos was returning unsuccessful but 
decided to sail north with Gordillo, hoping to fill his hold 
with Indians from the continent. In June, 1521, driven 
before a gale, they reached the mainland in latitude 33" 
30' at the mouth of a river which they called St. John 
Baptist.^ The region was called Chicora by the Indians. 
At first the natives stood amazed at the floating appari- 
tions, but became terror-stricken and fled when a party 



2 Herrera, Deseripcion de laa Indiaa Oecidentalea. . . (Madrid, 1726), 
Dec. ii, lib. vii, cap. iv. 

3 Oviedo, Historia general y natural de laa Indiaa. . . (Madrid, 1851-1855), 
Tol. iii, lib. xxxvii. 

4 Shea in Narrative and Critical History of America (New York, 1884- 
1887), vol. II, 238; Navarrete, Coleccion de laa viagea y descubrimientoa. . . 
(Madrid, 1825-1837), vol. Ill, 69-71. 

5 According to the account of Quexos they made a landfall at 33 «> 30' 
(Narrative and Critical Hiatory, II, 239), but the points touched are placed at 
85°, 36°, and 37° in Coleccion de documentos ineditos. . . (Pacheco y Cardenas) 
(Madrid. 1864-1884), XXII. However, the reckonings of that day were ex- 
tremely inaccurate. No river of considerable size empties into the sea at 33° 30'. 
The probability is that they reached Winyah Bay into which the Peedee and 
Black Rivers, as well as several inconsiderable streams, empty. 



A Spanish Settlement in Carolina 341 

of Spaniards landed and approached them. The visitors 
finally won their confidence by a display of gifts. Taking 
possession of the land in the name of the king of Spain, 
the Spaniards crossed over the bay and explored the in- 
terior for some distance.^ 

Having examined the region and conceived a favorable 
impression of it, the Spaniards decided to return to Es- 
panola. Before setting forth they beguiled 150 natives 
into going on board the ships, and although it was in 
direct contradiction to Ayllon's orders, lifted their an- 
chors and sailed away with the intention of selling the 
captives into slavery when they reached the Indies. When 
apprised of this outrage Ayllon was filled with indigna- 
tion and brought the case before a commission presided 
over by Diego Columbus. As a result the Indians were 
set free on the island of Espaiiola. One of the former 
captives who was possessed of considerable shrewdness, 
as his later exploits show, was converted and baptized 
under the name of Francisco Chicora. 

Accompanied by Francisco, Ayllon now hastened to 
Spain to obtain permission to colonize Chicora.'^ Here 
he met and was assisted by the eminent Spanish histo- 
rians, Oviedo and Peter Martyr.^ It was now that Fran- 
cisco Chicora came into prominence. As a spinner of ex- 
traordinary stories history does not record his superior. 
Considering the credulity of his audience one can under- 
stand how the quick-witted but homesick savage perceived 
a method of ending his forced exile by exciting the curi- 
osity and cupidity of the Spaniards. He recounted lliat 
in his country the natives were white, that the kings and 
queens were giants — elongated in their youth by rubbing 
their bodies with ointments concocted from strange herb? 



6 Shea in Narrative and Critical History, II, 238 ; cf. Lowery, The Spanish 
Settlements within jthe present limits of the United States, 1513-1561, 156. 

7 Coleccion de documeMos ineditos, XXXV, 241. 

8 Barcia, Ensayo chronolcgico para la historia general de la Florida. . . 
(Madrid, 1723). aiio 1526. 



342 J. G. Johnson 

— ^then stretched like wax until they were of enormous 
height. He also told of a race of men in Chicora with 
marvellously long tails; that they bored holes through 
their seats through which the tails dangled when they 
were seated ;^ that the people of Chicora made cheese from 
the milk of their women ; that deer were kept in enclos- 
ures and sent out with shepherds.^o Regarding the giant 
king of Chicora, Peter Martyr says : 

"They are governed by a king of gigantic size, called Datha, 
whose wife is as large as himself. They have five children. In 
place of horses the king is carried on the shoulders of strong young 
men, who run with him to the different places he wishes to visit. 
... I now come to a point which will appear incredible to your 
excellency. You already know that the ruler of this region is a 
tyrant of gigantic size. How does it happen that only he and his 
wife have attained this extraordinary size? No one of their sub- 
jects has explained this to me, but I have questioned the above- 
mentioned licenciate Ayllon, a serious and responsible man, who 
had his information from those who had shared with him the cost 
of the expedition. I likewise questioned the servant Francisco, to 
whom the neighbors had spoken. Neither nature nor birth has 
given these princes the advantage of size as an hereditary gift; 
they have acquired it by artifice. While they are still in their 
cradles and in charge of their nurses, experts in the matter are 
called, who by the application of certain herbs, soften their young 
bones. During a period of several days they rub the limbs of the 
child with these herbs, until the bones become as soft as wax. 
They rapidly bend them in such wise that the infant is almost 
killed. Afterwards they feed the nurse on foods of a special vir- 
tue. The child is wrapped in warm covers, the nurse gives it her 
breast and revives it with her milk, thus gifted with strengthening 
properties. After some days of rest the lamentable task of stretch- 
ing the bones is begun anew. Such is the explanation given by 
the servant, Francisco Chicorana."ii 

Cortes had found immense wealth in Mexico, and with- 
in a few years Pizarro was to win untold treasure in 
Peru. Eldorado, the Seven Cities of Cibola, the country 
of the Amazons, — all these and more were firing the 
imaginations of adventurous Spaniards. The "Northern 
Mystery" was again beginning to beckon, and not even 
the tragedy of Ponce de Leon could diminish the lust for 
treasure and adventure. 



9 Navarrete. Coleocion, vol. iii, 153 ; Herrera, Descrivcion de las Jndias 
Occidentales, Dec. ii, lib. x, cap. vi ; Barcia, Eveayo chronologico, ano 1520. 

10 Gomara, La historia general dc las India^T^-^S. 

11 Peter Martyr, De Orhe Novo. English translation by F. A. MacNutt. 
(New York, 1912). II, 259-269. 



A Spanish Settlement in Carolina 343 

Ayllon experienced no difficulty in persuading Charles 
V to confer upon him the title of adelantado^^ which was 
usually borne by early Spanish frontier governors and 
conquerors. He was granted permission to plant a col- 
ony in Chicora but the stipulation was that he should do 
so at his own expense. According to the cedula he was 
to start the expedition in 1524, but finding preparations 
lagging behind, an extension of time was granted. In 
the agreement Ayllon bound himself to make every pro- 
vision for the welfare of the proposed colony. Mission- 
aries and surgeons were to be transported thither to look 
after the physical and spiritual well-being of the colon- 
ists ; agriculture was to be encouraged, and captives were 
to be purchased from the Indians to be used in cultivating 
the farms of Chicora. 

Ayllon now returned to Espanola where he busied 
himself with preparations for the undertaking. During 
the delay Quexos was again sent to the continent, this 
time with two caravels, to explore the coast, take posses- 
sion of the land for Spain, and bring back several Indians 
to be trained as interpreters. He fulfilled the mission and 
increased the enthusiasm by displaying a small quantity 
of gold, silver, and pearls which he had obtained in Chi- 
cora.^2 

It was not until June, 1526, that Ayllon was ready 
to set out with his colonists. Considering numbers and 
equipment it was a more formidable array than that 
which had already conquered Mexico, or that other which 
was shortly to overthrow the Inca in Peru. Seven ves- 
sels, 600 men and women, among whom were several 
slaves, and 83 horses made up the expedition. 



12 Coleceion de doeumentoa ineditos, XXII, 79. 

13 Barcia, Enaayo chronologico, ano 1524. 



344 J. G. Johnson 

Reaching the mainland north of the peninsula of Flor- 
ida the Spaniards proceeded up the coast until they came 
to the mouth of a river in 33° 40',^^ which Ayllon 
called the Jordan for one of his captains. In all probabil- 
ity this river was the Cape Fear, as it is the only stream 
of considerable size emptying into the sea near that lati- 
tude. At this time a serious accident befell the party 
when one of the ships with a large quantity of provisions 
sank in the river, but not before the passengers and crew 
had been rescued. To replace this vessel a gabarra, an 
open boat propelled by sails or oars, was constructed.^^ 

Exploring parties were sent out by water and land to 
seek a more desirable site for a settlement. It was now 
that a second catastrophe overtook the expedition, namely 
the desertion of Francisco Chicora, who made his way 
through the forests to his own people. After a few days 
one of the parties returned and reported the discovery 
of a more suitable site. Whereupon the entire expedition 
moved down the coast forty or forty-five leagues until 
they came to another river which they called the Guadalpe, 
Here the settlement of San Miguel de Guadalpe was 
founded. Doubtless the river was the Santee and the 
settlement was established at or near its mouth.^^ A 
plentiful supply of fish was found in the river and the 
Indians were peaceable, but nevertheless the settlement 
soon went to pieces. When winter came on many died of 



14 Herrera, Deseripcion de las Indiaa Occidentalea, Dec. iii, lib. viii, cap. 
viii. 

15 Navarrete, Coleccion, vol. iii, 72. 

16 There is some disagreement as to where the settlement was established. 
Lowery, Spanish Settlements, 166, suggests the Peedee. Shea in Narrative and 
Critical History, II, 285, seems to think that the settlement was north of Capo 
Hatteras. However, the most definite evidence is found in Oviedo, Historia 
general . . . , 628, where it is said that the region "esta en treynta 6 tres grados 
para arriba." An examination of a map of the South Carolina coast reveals 
the fact that the Santee empties into the sea a little above 33. » The early 
geographer, L6pez de Velasco, in his Geografia y deseripcion universal de laa 
Indias (Madrid, 1894), does not show the settlement at all. Hernando Colon's 
map (1527), number 38 of the Kohl Collection (reproduced in Lowery, S-nanish 
Settlements, 146), now belonging to the State Department of the United States, 
indicates vaguely the ticrra del licenciado Ayllon, on the Atlantic coast, 
tngly near the present dividing line of North and South Carolina. 



A Spanish Settlement in Carolina 345 

famine. On October 18, 1526, Ayllon died, and mutiny, 
added to the scarcity of provisions and the lack of dwell- 
ings, brought about the total disruption of the venture. 

Just before Ayllon's death he designated his nephew, 
Juan Ramirez, as his successor, but as Ramirez was in 
Porto Rico, Francisco Gomez assumed command.^'' Now 
a number of the soldiers becoming dissatisfied, imprisoned 
Gomez and the other officials. In time Gomez was rescued 
and had the leaders of the revolt put to death. Placing 
the body of Ayllon on the gabarra, which had been con- 
structed on Cape Fear River, the survivors, numbering 
150, deserted the colony and set out for Espaiiola.^* On 
their return the Spaniards suffered bitterly from the cold. 
We are told that seven froze to death, and in such desper- 
ate straits did they find themselves, that Ayllon's body 
was consigned to the sea.^^ 

Ayllon left his family in straitened circumstances, as 
he had sunk his entire fortune in the Chicora venture.^o 
In order to recoup the fallen fortunes of the family his 
widow and his son, Lucas Vasquez Ayllon, attempted to 
secure an extension of the patent for themselves.^i The 
extension was granted to the son but he failed in his at- 
tempt to recruit another colonizing expedition. The dis- 
appointment undermined his health and he died in Es- 
panola.22 



17 Lowery, Spanish Settlementa, 167. 

18 Lowery, loc. cit. 

19 Oviedo, Hiaioria general, vol. iii, lib. xxxvii, cap. iii. 

20 Navarrete, Coleccion, vol. iii, 73. 
21. Ibid. 

22 Barcia, Ensayo chronologieo, ano 1625. 



BOOK REVIEWS 

The Formative Period in Alabama 1815-1828, By 
Thomas Perkins Abernethy, Ph.D. (Montgomery: The 
Brown Printing Company. 1922. Publication of the 
Alabama State Department of Archives and History, His- 
torical and Patriotic Series No. 6) 

This is a doctoral dissertation written under the di- 
rection of Professor Frederick J. Turner of Harvard Uni- 
versity, which would be clearly evident even were it not 
so stated. It is an excellent piece of work, deserving a 
better fate than it could have at the hands of any state 
printers. The swing of immigration around the Gulf is 
well set forth. The labyrinthian complications of terri- 
torial disputes involving Spain, the United States, Geor- 
gia, and even in a way the Indians; the physiographic 
nature of the new country; the immigrants and their 
characteristics; the division of the territory, the admis- 
sion of the two states of Mississippi and Alabama, and 
the disputes leading up to their admission ; Indian wars ; 
public lands; rivers and roads; commerce and banks; 
religion, education, newspapers; agriculture and slavery 
— all are given their proper place in the picture to make 
it complete. 

In developing the political side, the important part 
played by Georgians in early Alabama politics is noted. 
For a time under the leadership of William W. Bibb, John 
W. Walker, and Charles Tait within the state, and William 
H. Crawford, Secretary of the Treasury at Washington, 
the Georgia party carried the day. The political elements 
not only ranged around various groups bound together 
because they came from Georgia, North Carolina or Vir- 
ginia, but especially are they to be seen growing out of 
the economic and social status of the people. The strong 
sectionalism between the northern and southern parts of 
the state is clearly seen in the economic situation and sur- 



Book Reviews 347 

roundings. The gradual development of the small farmer 
and more radical man into the Democratic Party, and the 
planter and more conservative man into the Whig Party, 
the author promises to treat further and explain more 
fully in a future work. 

The author has produced this work out of a wide 
research in the available printed and manuscript sources, 
A bibliography with explanations is included ; as are also 
thirty-four maps,prints, and charts, of considerable value. 
There is no index. The author's style is concise and clear ; 
but now and then a few rather abrupt repetitions have 
crept in, as for example, concerning the task of slaves on 
pages 67 and 135. E. M. C. 

Savannah Duels and Duellists, 1733-1877, (Annals 
of Savannah, vol. 1.) By Thomas Gamble. (Savannah: 
Review Publishing & Printing Co., 1923. pp. VII, 302.) 

In writing this interesting account of a by-gone phase 
of Savannah's earlier life, Mr. Gamble has made a pains- 
taking search through the files of the newspapers, and 
other records, and has brought to light a large number of 
interesting facts. The book serves not only as a record of 
the peculiar customs of duelling, but as an illustration of 
many social customs and conventions of the period cov- 
ered, during the latter part of which these customs were 
slowly changing, and the practice of duelling was slowly 
dying out. **Duelling came into Georgia with the first 
settlers from England as an accepted element of the social 
code. Among the army men who soon came to its shores 
were unquestionably those who had participated in duels 
either as principles or seconds. It was an age when few 
questioned the propriety of settling personal affairs of 
honor at the point of the sword, or with bullets from a 
brace of pistols." 



348 Book Reviews 

A fatal duel was fought at least as early as 1740, seven 
years after the founding of the colony. Inasmuch as Ogle- 
thorpe himself, according to Boswell, in conversation with 
Doctor Johnson, Goldsmith, and Boswell, asserted a man's 
right to defend his honor, it seems probable that the 
General made no definite effort to prevent duelling among 
his officers, though it is not known that he himself fought. 
Button Gwinnett, signer of the Declaration of Independ- 
ence, was one of the Revolutionary notables who lost his 
life in response to the "code of honor." In 1826-27 the 
Savannah Anti-Duelling Association was organized, but 
in spite of its efforts the custom died hard, and the last 
fatal duel on record in Savannah was not fought until 
1870. 

Two especially interesting chapters treat of "James 
Jackson, Chief of Savannah Duellists," and "The Tatt- 
nalls. Congressman and Commodore." "Political Feuds 
and Resulting Duels" shows the ease with which the bit- 
ter political quarrels of our early days developed into 
personal quarrels which could be settled only by recourse 
to the pistol or the sword. Some interesting side-lights 
are thrown on the Burr-Hamilton duel, and in connection 
with many local quarrels much interesting information 
is brought out concerning men prominent in Georgia his- 
tory. In connection with the challenging of Israel K. 
Teff t, a brief account is given of the founding of the Geor- 
gia Historical Society through the efforts of Tefft, Dr. 
Arnold, and Bishop Stevens. The same chapter has an 
interesting description of the invaluable library of A. A. 
Smets, containing many priceless books, early products of 
the first printing presses, and medieval manuscripts, and 
of the ever to be lamented dispersal of this collection. 

The work is copiously indexed. It is issued as the first 
volume in a projected series of "Annals of Savannah," 
future volumes of which will deal with other phases of 



Book Reviews 349 

the life and customs of the people of Savannah in early 
days. Mr. Gamble is to be congratulated on the success 
of his painstaking interest in making available for per- 
manent preservation so many facts, which otherwise 
would remain forgotten, illustrative of the early life of 
Georgia. C. S. T. 



EDITORIAL NOTE 

The supply of the Quarterly for September, 1922 
(Vol. VI, No. 3), is practically exhausted, and the editors 
wish to obtain as many copies as possible of that number. 
If any members of the Society who are not binding the 
Quarterly or do not endeavor to keep their files complete, 
have copies of the number referred to, and will send 
them to the Managing Editor, Savannah Public Library, 
the courtesy will be very highly appreciated, as copies 
are frequently requested by libraries where it is impor- 
tant that complete files of the Quarterly should be avail- 
able. 



PRINTED BY 
REVIEW PUBLISHING & PRINTING COMPANY 
SAVANNAH, GA. 



:man 

Y INC. 

MAR 92 

N. MANCHESTER, 
INDIANA 46962